All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	hannes@cmpxchg.org, clm@meta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	willy@infradead.org, kirill@shutemov.name, bfoster@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/12] fs: add RWF_UNCACHED iocb and FOP_UNCACHED file_operations flag
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2024 09:35:39 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241206173539.GA7816@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241203153232.92224-9-axboe@kernel.dk>

On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 08:31:43AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> If a file system supports uncached buffered IO, it may set FOP_UNCACHED
> and enable RWF_UNCACHED. If RWF_UNCACHED is attempted without the file
> system supporting it, it'll get errored with -EOPNOTSUPP.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> ---
>  include/linux/fs.h      | 14 +++++++++++++-
>  include/uapi/linux/fs.h |  6 +++++-
>  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
> index 7e29433c5ecc..b64a78582f06 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> @@ -322,6 +322,7 @@ struct readahead_control;
>  #define IOCB_NOWAIT		(__force int) RWF_NOWAIT
>  #define IOCB_APPEND		(__force int) RWF_APPEND
>  #define IOCB_ATOMIC		(__force int) RWF_ATOMIC
> +#define IOCB_UNCACHED		(__force int) RWF_UNCACHED
>  
>  /* non-RWF related bits - start at 16 */
>  #define IOCB_EVENTFD		(1 << 16)
> @@ -356,7 +357,8 @@ struct readahead_control;
>  	{ IOCB_SYNC,		"SYNC" }, \
>  	{ IOCB_NOWAIT,		"NOWAIT" }, \
>  	{ IOCB_APPEND,		"APPEND" }, \
> -	{ IOCB_ATOMIC,		"ATOMIC"}, \
> +	{ IOCB_ATOMIC,		"ATOMIC" }, \
> +	{ IOCB_UNCACHED,	"UNCACHED" }, \
>  	{ IOCB_EVENTFD,		"EVENTFD"}, \
>  	{ IOCB_DIRECT,		"DIRECT" }, \
>  	{ IOCB_WRITE,		"WRITE" }, \
> @@ -2127,6 +2129,8 @@ struct file_operations {
>  #define FOP_UNSIGNED_OFFSET	((__force fop_flags_t)(1 << 5))
>  /* Supports asynchronous lock callbacks */
>  #define FOP_ASYNC_LOCK		((__force fop_flags_t)(1 << 6))
> +/* File system supports uncached read/write buffered IO */
> +#define FOP_UNCACHED		((__force fop_flags_t)(1 << 7))
>  
>  /* Wrap a directory iterator that needs exclusive inode access */
>  int wrap_directory_iterator(struct file *, struct dir_context *,
> @@ -3614,6 +3618,14 @@ static inline int kiocb_set_rw_flags(struct kiocb *ki, rwf_t flags,
>  		if (!(ki->ki_filp->f_mode & FMODE_CAN_ATOMIC_WRITE))
>  			return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  	}
> +	if (flags & RWF_UNCACHED) {

Should FMODE_NOREUSE imply RWF_UNCACHED?  I know, I'm dredging this up
again from v3:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/ZzKn4OyHXq5r6eiI@dread.disaster.area/

but the manpage for fadvise says NOREUSE means "The specified data will
be accessed only once." and I think that fits what you're doing here.
And yeah, it's annoying that people keep asking for moar knobs to tweak
io operations: Let's have a mount option, and a fadvise mode, and a
fcntl mode, and finally per-io flags!  (mostly kidding)

Also, one of your replies referenced a poc to set UNCACHED on NOREUSE
involving willy and yu.  Where was that?  I've found this:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/ZzI97bky3Rwzw18C@casper.infradead.org/

but that turned into a documentation discussion.

There were also a few unanswered questions (imo) from the last few
iterations of this patchset.

If someone issues a lot of small appending uncached writes to a file,
does that mean the writes and writeback will now be lockstepping each
other to write out the folio?  Or should programs simply not do that?

What if I wanted to do a bunch of small writes to adjacent bytes,
amortize writeback over a single disk io, and not wait for reclaim to
drop the folio?  Admittedly that doesn't really fit with "will be
accessed only once" so I think "don't do that" is an acceptable answer.

And, I guess if the application really wants fine-grained control then
it /can/ still pwrite, sync_file_range, and fadvise(WONTNEED).  Though
that's three syscalls/uring ops/whatever.  But that might be cheaper
than repeated rewrites.

--D

> +		/* file system must support it */
> +		if (!(ki->ki_filp->f_op->fop_flags & FOP_UNCACHED))
> +			return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +		/* DAX mappings not supported */
> +		if (IS_DAX(ki->ki_filp->f_mapping->host))
> +			return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +	}
>  	kiocb_flags |= (__force int) (flags & RWF_SUPPORTED);
>  	if (flags & RWF_SYNC)
>  		kiocb_flags |= IOCB_DSYNC;
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/fs.h b/include/uapi/linux/fs.h
> index 753971770733..dc77cd8ae1a3 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/fs.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/fs.h
> @@ -332,9 +332,13 @@ typedef int __bitwise __kernel_rwf_t;
>  /* Atomic Write */
>  #define RWF_ATOMIC	((__force __kernel_rwf_t)0x00000040)
>  
> +/* buffered IO that drops the cache after reading or writing data */
> +#define RWF_UNCACHED	((__force __kernel_rwf_t)0x00000080)
> +
>  /* mask of flags supported by the kernel */
>  #define RWF_SUPPORTED	(RWF_HIPRI | RWF_DSYNC | RWF_SYNC | RWF_NOWAIT |\
> -			 RWF_APPEND | RWF_NOAPPEND | RWF_ATOMIC)
> +			 RWF_APPEND | RWF_NOAPPEND | RWF_ATOMIC |\
> +			 RWF_UNCACHED)
>  
>  #define PROCFS_IOCTL_MAGIC 'f'
>  
> -- 
> 2.45.2
> 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2024-12-06 17:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-12-03 15:31 [PATCHSET v6 0/12] Uncached buffered IO Jens Axboe
2024-12-03 15:31 ` [PATCH 01/12] mm/filemap: change filemap_create_folio() to take a struct kiocb Jens Axboe
2024-12-10 11:13   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-12-12 15:49     ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-03 15:31 ` [PATCH 02/12] mm/readahead: add folio allocation helper Jens Axboe
2024-12-03 15:31 ` [PATCH 03/12] mm: add PG_uncached page flag Jens Axboe
2024-12-03 15:31 ` [PATCH 04/12] mm/readahead: add readahead_control->uncached member Jens Axboe
2024-12-03 15:31 ` [PATCH 05/12] mm/filemap: use page_cache_sync_ra() to kick off read-ahead Jens Axboe
2024-12-10 11:15   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-12-03 15:31 ` [PATCH 06/12] mm/truncate: add folio_unmap_invalidate() helper Jens Axboe
2024-12-10 11:21   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-12-12 20:19     ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-03 15:31 ` [PATCH 07/12] fs: add RWF_UNCACHED iocb and FOP_UNCACHED file_operations flag Jens Axboe
2024-12-06 17:35   ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2024-12-10 11:22   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-12-12 19:42     ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-03 15:31 ` [PATCH 08/12] mm/filemap: add read support for RWF_UNCACHED Jens Axboe
2024-12-03 15:31 ` [PATCH 09/12] mm/filemap: drop uncached pages when writeback completes Jens Axboe
2024-12-03 15:31 ` [PATCH 10/12] mm/filemap: add filemap_fdatawrite_range_kick() helper Jens Axboe
2024-12-03 15:31 ` [PATCH 11/12] mm/filemap: make buffered writes work with RWF_UNCACHED Jens Axboe
2024-12-06 17:17   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-12-06 18:22     ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-10 11:31       ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-12-12 15:51         ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-03 15:31 ` [PATCH 12/12] mm: add FGP_UNCACHED folio creation flag Jens Axboe
2024-12-03 18:23 ` [PATCHSET v6 0/12] Uncached buffered IO Christoph Lameter (Ampere)
2024-12-03 21:06   ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-03 22:16     ` Christoph Lameter (Ampere)
2024-12-03 22:41       ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-04  5:52         ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-12-04 16:36           ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-10 11:11           ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-12-12 15:48             ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-12 16:59               ` Christoph Lameter (Ampere)
2024-12-12 19:14                 ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-12 19:35                   ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-12-12 19:36                     ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-12 20:06                     ` Christoph Lameter (Ampere)
2024-12-13  5:04                     ` Johannes Weiner
2024-12-13 14:49                       ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-06 17:37 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-12-10  9:48 ` Bharata B Rao
2024-12-12 15:46   ` Jens Axboe

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=20241206173539.GA7816@frogsfrogsfrogs \
    --to=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bfoster@redhat.com \
    --cc=clm@meta.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /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.