Re: + fs-introduce-write_begin-write_end-and-perform_write-aops.patch added to -mm tree

Dmitriy Monakhov
2007-06-13T10:39:44Z

On 14:19 Втр 29 Май , akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote:
>
> The patch titled
> fs: introduce write_begin, write_end, and perform_write aops
> has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
> fs-introduce-write_begin-write_end-and-perform_write-aops.patch
>
> *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
>
> See http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/added-to-mm.txt to find
> out what to do about this
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Subject: fs: introduce write_begin, write_end, and perform_write aops
> From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
>
> These are intended to replace prepare_write and commit_write with more
> flexible alternatives that are also able to avoid the buffered write
> deadlock problems efficiently (which prepare_write is unable to do).
>
> [mark.fasheh@oracle.com: API design contributions, code review and fixes]
> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
I've finaly find time to review Nick's "write_begin/write_end aop" patch set.
And i have some fixes and questions. My be i've missed somthing and it was
already disscussed, but i cant find in LKML.

1) loop dev:
loop.c code itself is not perfect. In fact before Nick's patch
partial write was't possible. Assumption what write chunks are
always page aligned is realy weird ( see "index++" line).
Fixed by "new aop loop fix" patch

2)block_write_begin:
After we enter to block_write_begin with *pagep == NULL and
some page was grabed we remember this page in *pagep
And if __block_prepare_write() we have to clear *pagep , as
it was before. Because this may confuse caller.
for example caller may have folowing code:
ret = block_write_begin(..., pagep,...)
if (ret && *pagep != NULL) {
unlock_page(*pagep);
page_cache_release(*pagep);
}
Fixed my "new aop block_write_begin fix" patch

3) __page_symlink:
Nick's patch add folowing code:
+ err = pagecache_write_begin(NULL, mapping, 0,PAGE_CACHE_SIZE,
+ AOP_FLAG_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, &page,&fsdata);
symlink now consume whole page. I have only one question "WHY???".
I don't see any advantages, but where are huge list of
dissdvantages:
a) fs with blksize == 1k and pagesize == 16k after this patch
waste more than 10x times disk space for nothing.
b) What happends if we want use fs with blksize == 4k on i386
after it was used by ia64 ??? (before this patch it was
possible).

I dont prepare patch for this because i dont understand issue
witch Nick aimed to fix.

4) iov_iter_fault_in_readable:
Function prerform check for signgle region, with out respect to
segment nature of iovec, For example writev no longer works :) :
writev(3, [{"\1", 1}, {"\2"..., 4096}], 2) = -1 EFAULT (Bad address)
this hidden bug, and it was invisiable because XXXX_fault_in_readable
return value was ignored before. Lets iov_iter_fault_in_readable
perform checks for all segments.
Fixed by :"iov_iter_fault_in_readable fix"

5) ext3_write_end:
Before write_begin/write_end patch set we have folowing locking
order:
stop_journal(handle);
unlock_page(page);
But now order is oposite:
unlock_page(page);
stop_journal(handle);
Can we got any race condition now? I'm not sure is it actual problem,
may be somebody cant describe this.