From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>,
Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@linux.ibm.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] ext4: Do not fallback to buffered-io for DIO atomic write
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 14:51:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241031215111.GF21832@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3c6f41ebed5ca2a669fb05ccc38e8530d0e3e220.1730286164.git.ritesh.list@gmail.com>
On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 09:27:41PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
> atomic writes is currently only supported for single fsblock and only
> for direct-io. We should not return -ENOTBLK for atomic writes since we
> want the atomic write request to either complete fully or fail
> otherwise. We should not fallback to buffered-io in case of DIO atomic
> write requests.
> Let's also catch if this ever happens by adding some WARN_ON_ONCE before
> buffered-io handling for direct-io atomic writes.
>
> More details of the discussion [1].
>
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/cover.1729825985.git.ritesh.list@gmail.com/T/#m9dbecc11bed713ed0d7a486432c56b105b555f04
>
> Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
> ---
> fs/ext4/file.c | 7 +++++++
> fs/ext4/inode.c | 14 +++++++++-----
> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/file.c b/fs/ext4/file.c
> index 8116bd78910b..61787a37e9d4 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/file.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/file.c
> @@ -599,6 +599,13 @@ static ssize_t ext4_dio_write_iter(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from)
> ssize_t err;
> loff_t endbyte;
>
> + /*
> + * There is no support for atomic writes on buffered-io yet,
> + * we should never fallback to buffered-io for DIO atomic
> + * writes.
> + */
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_ATOMIC);
> +
> offset = iocb->ki_pos;
> err = ext4_buffered_write_iter(iocb, from);
> if (err < 0)
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> index fcdee27b9aa2..26b3c84d7f64 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> @@ -3449,12 +3449,16 @@ static int ext4_iomap_end(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t length,
> {
> /*
> * Check to see whether an error occurred while writing out the data to
> - * the allocated blocks. If so, return the magic error code so that we
> - * fallback to buffered I/O and attempt to complete the remainder of
> - * the I/O. Any blocks that may have been allocated in preparation for
> - * the direct I/O will be reused during buffered I/O.
> + * the allocated blocks. If so, return the magic error code for
> + * non-atomic write so that we fallback to buffered I/O and attempt to
> + * complete the remainder of the I/O.
> + * For atomic writes we will simply fail the I/O request if we coudn't
> + * write anything. For non-atomic writes, any blocks that may have been
> + * allocated in preparation for the direct I/O will be reused during
> + * buffered I/O.
> */
> - if (flags & (IOMAP_WRITE | IOMAP_DIRECT) && written == 0)
> + if (!(flags & IOMAP_ATOMIC) && (flags & (IOMAP_WRITE | IOMAP_DIRECT))
Huh. The WRITE|DIRECT check doesn't look right to me, because the
expression returns true for any write or any directio. I think that's
currently "ok" because ext4_iomap_end is only called for directio
writes, but this bugs me anyway. For a directio write fallback, that
comparison really should be:
(flags & (WRITE|DIRECT)) == (WRITE|DIRECT)
static inline bool
ext4_want_directio_fallback(unsigned flags, ssize_t written)
{
/* must be a directio to fall back to buffered */
if (flags & (IOMAP_WRITE | IOMAP_DIRECT)) !=
(IOMAP_WRITE | IOMAP_DIRECT)
return false;
/* atomic writes are all-or-nothing */
if (flags & IOMAP_ATOMIC)
return false;
/* can only try again if we wrote nothing */
return written == 0;
}
if (ext4_want_directio_fallback(flags, written))
return -ENOTBLK;
> + && written == 0)
Nit: put the '&&' operator on the previous line when there's a multiline
expression.
--D
> return -ENOTBLK;
>
> return 0;
> --
> 2.46.0
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-31 21:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-30 15:57 [PATCH v3 0/4] ext4: Add atomic writes support for DIO Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2024-10-30 15:57 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] ext4: Add statx support for atomic writes Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2024-10-31 21:42 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-11-01 2:30 ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-11-01 3:33 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-10-30 15:57 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] ext4: Check for atomic writes support in write iter Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2024-10-31 21:42 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-10-30 15:57 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] ext4: Support setting FMODE_CAN_ATOMIC_WRITE Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2024-10-31 21:42 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-10-30 15:57 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] ext4: Do not fallback to buffered-io for DIO atomic write Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2024-10-31 21:51 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2024-11-01 3:11 ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-10-31 22:01 ` [PATCH v3 0/4] ext4: Add atomic writes support for DIO Darrick J. Wong
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=20241031215111.GF21832@frogsfrogsfrogs \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ojaswin@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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.