From: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Josef Bacik <JBacik@fusionio.com>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk" <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
"jmoyer@redhat.com" <jmoyer@redhat.com>,
"zab@redhat.com" <zab@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] direct-io: allow file systems to do their own waiting for io
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2012 07:35:41 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121208123541.GE25713@shiny> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121208121730.GB18467@infradead.org>
On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 05:17:31AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 11:14:03AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 08:41:25AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 08:37:20AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > > > Btrfs is terrible with O_DIRECT|O_SYNC, mostly because of the constant
> > > > waiting. The thing is we have a handy way of waiting for IO that we can
> > > > delay to the very last second so we do all of the O_SYNC work and then wait
> > > > for a bunch of IO to complete. So introduce a flag to allow the generic
> > > > direct io stuff to forgo waiting and leave that up to the file system.
> > > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > I don't really like passing another flag for this, if we we are going to
> > > do something like this it should be in a way where:
> > >
> > > - the actualy waiting code is a helper that btrfs would also use
> > > - the main dio code is structured in a way that we have a lower level
> > > entry point that skips the waiting, and a higher level one that also
> > > calls it.
> > >
> > > That beeing said I'm not imaginative enough to see how you're actually
> > > going to use it. Posting the btrfs side would help with that.
> > >
> >
> > Hrm so I can do that, but it may not make much sense. Here are the two patches
> > that are relevant (older versions but they get the idea across)
> >
> > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/josef/btrfs-next.git;a=commit;h=78b40072c556d82fac5e58793a3178887ac057ec
> > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/josef/btrfs-next.git;a=commit;h=b7728f1b19eeb2041e3d4da22fd3d5a5c11abd3c
>
> I've looked over the patches but I still don't know what's going on,
> sorry for having to poke a bit deeper by mail.
>
> >
> > Basically what happens with btrfs now in O_SYNC/fsync() with either O_DIRECT or
> > not is this
> >
> > write()
> > fsync()/O_SYNC
> > start and wait on all io to complete
> > log changed metadata into special tree
> > write and wait on our new log
> > sync super which points at our new log
> >
> > What I'm trying to accomplish is this
> >
> > write()
> > fsync()/O_SYNC
> > start io
> > log changed metadata into special tree
> > write log and then wait on log and data
>
> How is going to be safe? You must only update the metadata once the
> data has made it to disk, that is the actual disk I/O for the metadata
> must only start once the disk I/O for the data has finished. For
> exactly that scenario the direct I/O code supports the end_io callback
> to notify the filesystem efficiently.
Thanks for reading through things. The current model without the patch
looks like this:
[ write data, wait for data ] [ write various tree blocks, wait ]
[ write the super, wait ]
One data block, 3 waits. But thanks to cow, the super commits the
metadata, so we could do this:
[ write the data ] [ write various tree blocks ] [ wait on all of it ]
[ write the super, wait ]
That's down to two waits. If we start using atomic writes on flash, we can
do it all as a single IO.
-chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-08 12:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-03 13:37 [PATCH] direct-io: allow file systems to do their own waiting for io Josef Bacik
2012-12-03 15:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-12-03 16:14 ` Josef Bacik
2012-12-08 12:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-12-08 12:35 ` Chris Mason [this message]
2012-12-14 13:44 ` Chris Mason
2012-12-11 10:00 ` Liu Bo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121208123541.GE25713@shiny \
--to=chris.mason@fusionio.com \
--cc=JBacik@fusionio.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--cc=zab@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.