From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: cmm@us.ibm.com, sandeen@redhat.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V2] ext4: Drop mapped buffer_head check during page_mkwrite
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:36:01 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090831170601.GA26003@skywalker.linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090831125025.GI20822@mit.edu>
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 08:50:25AM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 06:03:14PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > If the database is not being updated via a write(2), then even though
> > the blocks are already allocated, we won't find buffer_heads attached to the page.
> >
> > ie, page_buffers(page) will be NULL
> >
> > The page_mkwrite -> write_begin path would be allocating the buffer_heads
> > and attaching them to the page. So even in the above case we will be
> > doing write_begin -> write_end. That is, it is similar to the (a) i wrote
> > above.
>
> What about the case where they are being updated via llseek(2) and
> write(2)? I'll grant that isn't as common these days (dbm used to do
> it, but these days most people use berk_db, which does use mmap), but
> it's not a totally unknown thing to do. Certainly any of the
> e2fsprogs tools operating on a filesystem-image-in-a-file (which isn't
> that uncommon if you are using KVM or some other virtualization
> situation) uses llseek(2) and write(2). I'd have to check to see
> whether KVM/qemu is using mmap(2) or write(2).
>
> If we think when we update-in-place already allocated blocks, it's
> much more common to use mmap(2) than lseek(2)/write(2), then I can see
> how avoiding taking a page_lock in ext4_page_mkwrite() might be the
> right choice. On the other hand, if write(2) is more common, we'll be
> starting and stopping a transaction handle, and going through a *much*
> more complicated code path.
>
> The other question I have then is that there are multiple
> write_begin/write_end functions that could be used, if we are going to
> be dropping this check in ext4_page_mkwrite() and depending in
> write_begin/write_end to do the right thing. (ext4_write_begin,
> ext4_da_write_begin, ext4_ordered_write_end,
> ext4_journalled_write_end, ext4_writeback_write_end). You did check
> all of the possible code path combinations, to make sure they will do
> the right thing?
Both ext4_write_begin and ext4_da_write_begin use block_write_begin
which calls __block_prepare_write which looks at the mapped flag of the
buffer_head and call get_block if not mapped. Delayed alloc get_block
does block reservation and returns a mapped buffer_head and non delayed
alloc get_block does block allocation and returns a mapped buffer_head.
So in both the case i guess we are ok
-aneesh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-31 17:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-26 5:23 [PATCH -V2] ext4: Drop mapped buffer_head check during page_mkwrite Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-08-29 2:26 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-31 6:30 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-08-31 12:24 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-31 12:33 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-08-31 12:50 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-31 17:06 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V [this message]
2009-09-06 3:49 ` Theodore Tso
2009-09-07 12:22 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-09-07 9:44 ` [PATCH -v3] ext4: Take page lock before looking at attached buffer_heads flags Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-09-10 3:25 ` Theodore Tso
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=20090831170601.GA26003@skywalker.linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=cmm@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).