From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Mike Marshall <hubcap@omnibond.com>,
Martin Brandenburg <martin@omnibond.com>,
Carlos Maiolino <cem@kernel.org>, Stefan Roesch <shr@fb.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
gfs2@lists.linux.dev, io-uring@vger.kernel.org,
devel@lists.orangefs.org, linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: re-enable IOCB_NOWAIT writes to files
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 09:01:29 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251114170129.GI196370@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b7e8d5e3a0ce8da103f4591afc1f4a9c683ef3c7.camel@kernel.org>
On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 09:04:58AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-11-14 at 07:26 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > commit 66fa3cedf16a ("fs: Add async write file modification handling.")
> > effectively disabled IOCB_NOWAIT writes as timestamp updates currently
> > always require blocking, and the modern timestamp resolution means we
> > always update timestamps. This leads to a lot of context switches from
> > applications using io_uring to submit file writes, making it often worse
> > than using the legacy aio code that is not using IOCB_NOWAIT.
> >
> > This series allows non-blocking updates for lazytime if the file system
> > supports it, and adds that support for XFS.
> >
> > It also fixes the layering bypass in btrfs when updating timestamps on
> > device files for devices removed from btrfs usage, and FMODE_NOCMTIME
> > handling in the VFS now that nfsd started using it. Note that I'm still
> > not sure that nfsd usage is fully correct for all file systems, as only
> > XFS explicitly supports FMODE_NOCMTIME, but at least the generic code
> > does the right thing now.
> >
> > Diffstat:
> > Documentation/filesystems/locking.rst | 2
> > Documentation/filesystems/vfs.rst | 6 ++
> > fs/btrfs/inode.c | 3 +
> > fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 11 +--
> > fs/fat/misc.c | 3 +
> > fs/fs-writeback.c | 53 ++++++++++++++----
> > fs/gfs2/inode.c | 6 +-
> > fs/inode.c | 100 +++++++++++-----------------------
> > fs/internal.h | 3 -
> > fs/orangefs/inode.c | 7 ++
> > fs/overlayfs/inode.c | 3 +
> > fs/sync.c | 4 -
> > fs/ubifs/file.c | 9 +--
> > fs/utimes.c | 1
> > fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c | 29 ++++++++-
> > fs/xfs/xfs_super.c | 29 ---------
> > include/linux/fs.h | 17 +++--
> > include/trace/events/writeback.h | 6 --
> > 18 files changed, 152 insertions(+), 140 deletions(-)
>
> This all looks pretty reasonable to me. There are a few changelog and
> subject line typos, but the code changes look fine. You can add:
>
> Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
>
> As far as nfsd's usage of FMODE_NOCMTIME, it looks OK to me. That's
> implemented today by the check in file_modified_flags(), which is
> generic and should work across filesystems.
>
> The main exception is xfs_exchange_range() which has some special
> handling for it, but nfsd doesn't use that functionality so that
> shouldn't be an issue.
>
> Am I missing some subtlety?
In exchangerange specifically?
The FMODE_NOCMTIME checks in xfs_exchange_range exist to tell the
exchange-range code to update cmtime, but only if it decides to actually
go through with the mapping exchange. Since the mapping exchange
requires a transaction anyway, it's cheap to bundle in timestamp
updates.
Also there's no way that we can do nonblocking exchangerange so a NOWAIT
flag wouldn't be much help here anyway.
(I hope that answers your question)
--D
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Mike Marshall <hubcap@omnibond.com>,
Martin Brandenburg <martin@omnibond.com>,
Carlos Maiolino <cem@kernel.org>, Stefan Roesch <shr@fb.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
gfs2@lists.linux.dev, io-uring@vger.kernel.org,
devel@lists.orangefs.org, linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: re-enable IOCB_NOWAIT writes to files
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 09:01:29 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251114170129.GI196370@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b7e8d5e3a0ce8da103f4591afc1f4a9c683ef3c7.camel@kernel.org>
On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 09:04:58AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-11-14 at 07:26 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > commit 66fa3cedf16a ("fs: Add async write file modification handling.")
> > effectively disabled IOCB_NOWAIT writes as timestamp updates currently
> > always require blocking, and the modern timestamp resolution means we
> > always update timestamps. This leads to a lot of context switches from
> > applications using io_uring to submit file writes, making it often worse
> > than using the legacy aio code that is not using IOCB_NOWAIT.
> >
> > This series allows non-blocking updates for lazytime if the file system
> > supports it, and adds that support for XFS.
> >
> > It also fixes the layering bypass in btrfs when updating timestamps on
> > device files for devices removed from btrfs usage, and FMODE_NOCMTIME
> > handling in the VFS now that nfsd started using it. Note that I'm still
> > not sure that nfsd usage is fully correct for all file systems, as only
> > XFS explicitly supports FMODE_NOCMTIME, but at least the generic code
> > does the right thing now.
> >
> > Diffstat:
> > Documentation/filesystems/locking.rst | 2
> > Documentation/filesystems/vfs.rst | 6 ++
> > fs/btrfs/inode.c | 3 +
> > fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 11 +--
> > fs/fat/misc.c | 3 +
> > fs/fs-writeback.c | 53 ++++++++++++++----
> > fs/gfs2/inode.c | 6 +-
> > fs/inode.c | 100 +++++++++++-----------------------
> > fs/internal.h | 3 -
> > fs/orangefs/inode.c | 7 ++
> > fs/overlayfs/inode.c | 3 +
> > fs/sync.c | 4 -
> > fs/ubifs/file.c | 9 +--
> > fs/utimes.c | 1
> > fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c | 29 ++++++++-
> > fs/xfs/xfs_super.c | 29 ---------
> > include/linux/fs.h | 17 +++--
> > include/trace/events/writeback.h | 6 --
> > 18 files changed, 152 insertions(+), 140 deletions(-)
>
> This all looks pretty reasonable to me. There are a few changelog and
> subject line typos, but the code changes look fine. You can add:
>
> Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
>
> As far as nfsd's usage of FMODE_NOCMTIME, it looks OK to me. That's
> implemented today by the check in file_modified_flags(), which is
> generic and should work across filesystems.
>
> The main exception is xfs_exchange_range() which has some special
> handling for it, but nfsd doesn't use that functionality so that
> shouldn't be an issue.
>
> Am I missing some subtlety?
In exchangerange specifically?
The FMODE_NOCMTIME checks in xfs_exchange_range exist to tell the
exchange-range code to update cmtime, but only if it decides to actually
go through with the mapping exchange. Since the mapping exchange
requires a transaction anyway, it's cheap to bundle in timestamp
updates.
Also there's no way that we can do nonblocking exchangerange so a NOWAIT
flag wouldn't be much help here anyway.
(I hope that answers your question)
--D
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-14 17:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 94+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-14 6:26 re-enable IOCB_NOWAIT writes to files Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 01/14] fs: refactor file timestamp update logic Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-17 6:32 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-17 6:32 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-24 11:51 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-24 11:51 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 02/14] fs: lift the FMODE_NOCMTIME check into file_update_time_flags Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-17 6:38 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-17 6:38 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-24 11:54 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-24 11:54 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 03/14] fs: export vfs_utimes Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-17 6:38 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-17 6:38 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-24 11:55 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-24 11:55 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 04/14] btrfs: use vfs_utimes to update file timestamps Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 05/14] fs: remove inode_update_time Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-17 6:59 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-17 6:59 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-19 6:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-19 6:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-24 13:06 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-24 13:06 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 06/14] organgefs: use inode_update_timestamps directly Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 14:06 ` Jeff Layton
2025-11-14 14:06 ` Jeff Layton
2025-11-14 15:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 15:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-24 13:09 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-24 13:09 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 07/14] fs: return a negative error from generic_update_time Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-17 7:07 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-17 7:07 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-24 13:10 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-24 13:10 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 08/14] fs: exit early in generic_update_time when there is no work Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-24 13:11 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-24 13:11 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 09/14] fs: factor out a mark_inode_dirty_time helper Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-17 7:13 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-17 7:13 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-24 13:22 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-24 13:22 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-24 14:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-24 14:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 10/14] fs: factor out a sync_lazytime helper Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-17 7:38 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-17 7:38 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-19 6:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-19 6:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-24 13:31 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-24 13:31 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-24 14:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-24 14:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-24 17:36 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-24 17:36 ` Jan Kara
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 11/14] fs: add a ->sync_lazytime method Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-17 7:50 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-17 7:50 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 12/14] fs: add support for non-blocking timestamp updates Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 13/14] xfs: implement ->sync_lazytime Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` [PATCH 14/14] xfs: enable non-blocking timestamp updates Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 6:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 15:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 15:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-16 8:23 ` Dave Chinner
2025-11-16 8:23 ` Dave Chinner
2025-11-19 7:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-19 7:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 14:04 ` re-enable IOCB_NOWAIT writes to files Jeff Layton
2025-11-14 14:04 ` Jeff Layton
2025-11-14 15:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 15:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-14 19:47 ` Jeff Layton
2025-11-14 19:47 ` Jeff Layton
2025-11-14 17:01 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2025-11-14 17:01 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-11-14 17:21 ` Jeff Layton
2025-11-14 17:21 ` Jeff Layton
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=20251114170129.GI196370@frogsfrogsfrogs \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=cem@kernel.org \
--cc=devel@lists.orangefs.org \
--cc=dsterba@suse.com \
--cc=gfs2@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=hubcap@omnibond.com \
--cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin@omnibond.com \
--cc=shr@fb.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.