lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jul]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/4] mm: add file_fdatawait_range and file_write_and_wait
From
Date
Hi,


On 31/07/17 12:27, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-07-27 at 08:48 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
>> On Thu, 2017-07-27 at 10:49 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
>>> On Wed 26-07-17 13:55:36, Jeff Layton wrote:
>>>> +int file_write_and_wait(struct file *file)
>>>> +{
>>>> + int err = 0, err2;
>>>> + struct address_space *mapping = file->f_mapping;
>>>> +
>>>> + if ((!dax_mapping(mapping) && mapping->nrpages) ||
>>>> + (dax_mapping(mapping) && mapping->nrexceptional)) {
>>>> + err = filemap_fdatawrite(mapping);
>>>> + /* See comment of filemap_write_and_wait() */
>>>> + if (err != -EIO) {
>>>> + loff_t i_size = i_size_read(mapping->host);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (i_size != 0)
>>>> + __filemap_fdatawait_range(mapping, 0,
>>>> + i_size - 1);
>>>> + }
>>>> + }
>>> Err, what's the i_size check doing here? I'd just pass ~0 as the end of the
>>> range and ignore i_size. It is much easier than trying to wrap your head
>>> around possible races with file operations modifying i_size.
>>>
>>> Honza
>> I'm basically emulating _exactly_ what filemap_write_and_wait does here,
>> as I'm leery of making subtle behavior changes in the actual writeback
>> behavior. For example:
>>
>> -----------------8<----------------
>> static inline int __filemap_fdatawrite(struct address_space *mapping,
>> int sync_mode)
>> {
>> return __filemap_fdatawrite_range(mapping, 0, LLONG_MAX, sync_mode);
>> }
>>
>> int filemap_fdatawrite(struct address_space *mapping)
>> {
>> return __filemap_fdatawrite(mapping, WB_SYNC_ALL);
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(filemap_fdatawrite);
>> -----------------8<----------------
>>
>> ...which then sets up the wbc with the right ranges and sync mode and
>> kicks off writepages. But then, it does the i_size_read to figure out
>> what range it should wait on (with the shortcut for the size == 0 case).
>>
>> My assumption was that it was intentionally designed that way, but I'm
>> guessing from your comments that it wasn't? If so, then we can turn
>> file_write_and_wait a static inline wrapper around
>> file_write_and_wait_range.
> FWIW, I did a bit of archaeology in the linux-history tree and found
> this patch from Marcelo in 2004. Is this optimization still helpful? If
> not, then that does simplify the code a bit.
>
> -------------------8<--------------------
>
> [PATCH] small wait_on_page_writeback_range() optimization
>
> filemap_fdatawait() calls wait_on_page_writeback_range() with -1 as "end"
> parameter. This is not needed since we know the EOF from the inode. Use
> that instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
> ---
> mm/filemap.c | 8 +++++++-
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
> index 78e18b7639b6..55fb7b4141e4 100644
> --- a/mm/filemap.c
> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> @@ -287,7 +287,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(sync_page_range);
> */
> int filemap_fdatawait(struct address_space *mapping)
> {
> - return wait_on_page_writeback_range(mapping, 0, -1);
> + loff_t i_size = i_size_read(mapping->host);
> +
> + if (i_size == 0)
> + return 0;
> +
> + return wait_on_page_writeback_range(mapping, 0,
> + (i_size - 1) >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(filemap_fdatawait);
>

Does this ever get called in cases where we would not hold fs locks? In
that case we definitely don't want to be relying on i_size,

Steve.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-07-31 13:33    [W:0.078 / U:42.204 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site