All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org,  linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	 Trond Myklebust <trondmy@hammerspace.com>
Subject: Re: posix_fallocate behavior in glibc
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 19:57:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a5i0krml.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240729160951.GA30183@lst.de> (Christoph Hellwig's message of "Mon, 29 Jul 2024 18:09:51 +0200")

* Christoph Hellwig:

> The glibc implementation in sysdeps/posix/posix_fallocate.c, which is
> also by sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/posix_fallocate.c as a fallback if the
> fallocate syscall returns EOPNOTSUPP is implemented by doing single
> byte writes at intervals of min(f.f_bsize, 4096).

> How can we get rid of this glibc fallback that turns the implementations
> non-conformant and increases write amplication for no good reason?

When does the kernel return EOPNOTSUPP these days?  We do not even do
fallback for EPERM/ENOSYS, those that might be encountered in
containers.

Last time I looked at this I concluded that it does not make sense to
push this write loop from glibc to the applications.  That's what would
happen if we had a new version of posix_fallocate that didn't do those
writes.  We also updated the manual:

  Storage Allocation
  <https://sourceware.org/glibc/manual/latest/html_node/Storage-Allocation.html>

As mentioned, if an application doesn't want fallback behavior, it can
call fallocate directly.

Thanks,
Florian


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-07-29 17:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-07-29 16:09 posix_fallocate behavior in glibc Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 17:23 ` Paul Eggert
2024-07-29 17:43   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 17:54     ` Adhemerval Zanella Netto
     [not found]     ` <CAPBLoAf11hM0PLhqPG5gUyivU9U1manpOOhDWCPugUmWc1VVUw@mail.gmail.com>
2024-07-29 18:45       ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 17:57 ` Florian Weimer [this message]
2024-07-29 18:44   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 18:52     ` Florian Weimer
2024-07-29 19:01       ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 19:23         ` Florian Weimer
2024-07-30 15:47           ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-30 16:11             ` Paul Eggert
2024-07-30 16:20               ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-30 17:03                 ` Florian Weimer
2024-07-30 17:08                   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-30 17:29                     ` Florian Weimer
2024-07-30 17:52                   ` Mark Wielaard
2024-07-31  2:32                   ` Theodore Ts'o
2024-07-29 23:53       ` Dave Chinner
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-06-26  6:01 Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 15:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 15:11   ` Sam James

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=87a5i0krml.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com \
    --to=fweimer@redhat.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=trondmy@hammerspace.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.