From: majianpeng <majianpeng@gmail.com>
To: sage <sage@inktank.com>
Cc: ceph-devel <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] ceph: Don't use ceph-sync-mode for synchronous-fs.
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:46:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201307241246395750351@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: alpine.DEB.2.00.1307231812280.8332@cobra.newdream.net
>Hi,
>
>Sorry for the slow review. The patch looks good, but I have a hard time
>understanding your changelog... is it okay if I change it to something
>like:
>
>
>Sending reads and writes through the sync read/write paths bypasses the
>page cache, which is not expected or generally a good idea. Removing
>the write check is safe as there is a conditional vfs_fsync_range() later
>in ceph_aio_write that already checks for the same flag (via
>IS_SYNC(inode)).
>
Very good.
It's my fault. I will notice the message later.
Thanks !
Jianpeng Ma
>?
>
>Thanks!
>sage
>
>
>On Wed, 24 Jul 2013, majianpeng wrote:
>
>> Ping
>> >Hi sage,
>> > How about this patch?Can you give some advisement?
>> >Thanks!
>> >Jianpeng Ma
>> >>At now for synchronous-fs, all write-operations use ceph_sync_mode.
>> >>But for the file which opened with O_SYNC, it don't use sync_mode.
>> >>The behaviour of them should be the same.
>> >>For fs which mounted using '-o sync', it want all I/O to the filesystem
>> >>should be done synchronously.But the ceph-sync-mode don't be suitful
>> >>for.For example,using ceph-sync-mode the content of file don't have in
>> >>memory.This will cause the following read only from osd rather than
>> >>memory.
>> >>
>> >>Signed-off-by: Jianpeng Ma <majianpeng@gmail.com>
>> >>---
>> >> fs/ceph/file.c | 2 --
>> >> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>> >>
>> >>diff --git a/fs/ceph/file.c b/fs/ceph/file.c
>> >>index 656e169..44670ad 100644
>> >>--- a/fs/ceph/file.c
>> >>+++ b/fs/ceph/file.c
>> >>@@ -659,7 +659,6 @@ again:
>> >>
>> >> if ((got & (CEPH_CAP_FILE_CACHE|CEPH_CAP_FILE_LAZYIO)) == 0 ||
>> >> (iocb->ki_filp->f_flags & O_DIRECT) ||
>> >>- (inode->i_sb->s_flags & MS_SYNCHRONOUS) ||
>> >> (fi->flags & CEPH_F_SYNC))
>> >> /* hmm, this isn't really async... */
>> >> ret = ceph_sync_read(filp, base, len, ppos, &checkeof);
>> >>@@ -764,7 +763,6 @@ retry_snap:
>> >>
>> >> if ((got & (CEPH_CAP_FILE_BUFFER|CEPH_CAP_FILE_LAZYIO)) == 0 ||
>> >> (iocb->ki_filp->f_flags & O_DIRECT) ||
>> >>- (inode->i_sb->s_flags & MS_SYNCHRONOUS) ||
>> >> (fi->flags & CEPH_F_SYNC)) {
>> >> mutex_unlock(&inode->i_mutex);
>> >> written = ceph_sync_write(file, iov->iov_base, count,
>> >>--
>> >>1.8.1.2
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: majianpeng <majianpeng@gmail.com>
To: sage <sage@inktank.com>
Cc: ceph-devel <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] ceph: Don't use ceph-sync-mode for synchronous-fs.
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:46:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201307241246395750351@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: alpine.DEB.2.00.1307231812280.8332@cobra.newdream.net
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312", Size: 2408 bytes --]
>Hi,
>
>Sorry for the slow review. The patch looks good, but I have a hard time
>understanding your changelog... is it okay if I change it to something
>like:
>
>
>Sending reads and writes through the sync read/write paths bypasses the
>page cache, which is not expected or generally a good idea. Removing
>the write check is safe as there is a conditional vfs_fsync_range() later
>in ceph_aio_write that already checks for the same flag (via
>IS_SYNC(inode)).
>
Very good.
It's my fault. I will notice the message later.
Thanks !
Jianpeng Ma
>?
>
>Thanks!
>sage
>
>
>On Wed, 24 Jul 2013, majianpeng wrote:
>
>> Ping
>> >Hi sage,
>> > How about this patch?Can you give some advisement?
>> >Thanks!
>> >Jianpeng Ma
>> >>At now for synchronous-fs, all write-operations use ceph_sync_mode.
>> >>But for the file which opened with O_SYNC, it don't use sync_mode.
>> >>The behaviour of them should be the same.
>> >>For fs which mounted using '-o sync', it want all I/O to the filesystem
>> >>should be done synchronously.But the ceph-sync-mode don't be suitful
>> >>for.For example,using ceph-sync-mode the content of file don't have in
>> >>memory.This will cause the following read only from osd rather than
>> >>memory.
>> >>
>> >>Signed-off-by: Jianpeng Ma <majianpeng@gmail.com>
>> >>---
>> >> fs/ceph/file.c | 2 --
>> >> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>> >>
>> >>diff --git a/fs/ceph/file.c b/fs/ceph/file.c
>> >>index 656e169..44670ad 100644
>> >>--- a/fs/ceph/file.c
>> >>+++ b/fs/ceph/file.c
>> >>@@ -659,7 +659,6 @@ again:
>> >>
>> >> if ((got & (CEPH_CAP_FILE_CACHE|CEPH_CAP_FILE_LAZYIO)) == 0 ||
>> >> (iocb->ki_filp->f_flags & O_DIRECT) ||
>> >>- (inode->i_sb->s_flags & MS_SYNCHRONOUS) ||
>> >> (fi->flags & CEPH_F_SYNC))
>> >> /* hmm, this isn't really async... */
>> >> ret = ceph_sync_read(filp, base, len, ppos, &checkeof);
>> >>@@ -764,7 +763,6 @@ retry_snap:
>> >>
>> >> if ((got & (CEPH_CAP_FILE_BUFFER|CEPH_CAP_FILE_LAZYIO)) == 0 ||
>> >> (iocb->ki_filp->f_flags & O_DIRECT) ||
>> >>- (inode->i_sb->s_flags & MS_SYNCHRONOUS) ||
>> >> (fi->flags & CEPH_F_SYNC)) {
>> >> mutex_unlock(&inode->i_mutex);
>> >> written = ceph_sync_write(file, iov->iov_base, count,
>> >>--
>> >>1.8.1.2ÿôèº{.nÇ+·®+%Ëÿ±éݶ\x17¥wÿº{.nÇ+·¥{±þG«éÿ{ayº\x1dÊÚë,j\a¢f£¢·hïêÿêçz_è®\x03(éÝ¢j"ú\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿ¾\a«þG«éÿ¢¸?¨èÚ&£ø§~á¶iOæ¬z·vØ^\x14\x04\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿÃ\fÿ¶ìÿ¢¸?I¥
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-24 4:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-27 7:56 [PATCH] ceph: Don't use ceph-sync-mode for synchronous-fs majianpeng
2013-06-27 7:56 ` majianpeng
[not found] ` <201307161949279533980@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <201307240828220999500@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <alpine.DEB.2.00.1307231812280.8332@cobra.newdream.net>
2013-07-24 4:46 ` majianpeng [this message]
2013-07-24 4:46 ` majianpeng
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=201307241246395750351@gmail.com \
--to=majianpeng@gmail.com \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sage@inktank.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.