From: Matthew Bobrowski <mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
tytso@mit.edu, riteshh@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] ext4: introduce direct IO write code path using iomap infrastructure
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 21:45:17 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190829114515.GB2486@poseidon.bobrowski.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190828202619.GG22343@quack2.suse.cz>
On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 10:26:19PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Mon 12-08-19 22:53:26, Matthew Bobrowski wrote:
> Overall this is very nice. Some smaller comments below.
Awesome, thanks for the review Jan!
> > @@ -235,6 +244,34 @@ static ssize_t ext4_write_checks(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from)
> > return iov_iter_count(from);
> > }
> >
> > +static ssize_t ext4_buffered_write_iter(struct kiocb *iocb,
> > + struct iov_iter *from)
> > +{
> > + ssize_t ret;
> > + struct inode *inode = file_inode(iocb->ki_filp);
> > +
> > + if (!inode_trylock(inode)) {
> > + if (iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_NOWAIT)
> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > + inode_lock(inode);
> > + }
>
> Currently there's no support for IOCB_NOWAIT for buffered IO so you can
> replace this with "inode_lock(inode)".
Noted. I've also taken into consideration what Dave mentioned in the
other thread around explicitly checking for IOCB_NOWAIT and returning
EOPTNOTSUPP irrespective whether we can acquire the lock or not.
> > @@ -284,6 +321,128 @@ static int ext4_handle_inode_extension(struct inode *inode, loff_t size,
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
>
> I'd mention here that for cases where inode size is extended,
> ext4_dio_write_iter() waits for DIO to complete and thus we are protected
> by inode_lock in that case.
Easy.
> > +static int ext4_dio_write_end_io(struct kiocb *iocb, ssize_t size,
> > + ssize_t error, unsigned int flags)
>
> Here I'd expand the comment to explain that we wait in case inode is
> extended so that inode extension in ext4_dio_write_end_io() is properly
> covered by inode_lock.
>
Easy.
> > + if (ret == -EIOCBQUEUED && (unaligned_aio || extend))
> > + inode_dio_wait(inode);
> > +
> > + if (ret >= 0 && iov_iter_count(from)) {
> > + overwrite ? inode_unlock_shared(inode) : inode_unlock(inode);
> > + return ext4_buffered_write_iter(iocb, from);
> > + }
> > +out:
> > + overwrite ? inode_unlock_shared(inode) : inode_unlock(inode);
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > #ifdef CONFIG_FS_DAX
> > static ssize_t
> > ext4_dax_write_iter(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from)
>
> ...
>
> > @@ -3581,10 +3611,10 @@ static int ext4_iomap_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t length,
> > iomap->type = delalloc ? IOMAP_DELALLOC : IOMAP_HOLE;
> > iomap->addr = IOMAP_NULL_ADDR;
> > } else {
> > - if (map.m_flags & EXT4_MAP_MAPPED) {
> > - iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
> > - } else if (map.m_flags & EXT4_MAP_UNWRITTEN) {
> > + if (map.m_flags & EXT4_MAP_UNWRITTEN) {
> > iomap->type = IOMAP_UNWRITTEN;
> > + } else if (map.m_flags & EXT4_MAP_MAPPED) {
> > + iomap->type = IOMAP_MAPPED;
> > } else {
> > WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> > return -EIO;
>
> Possibly this hunk should go into a separate patch (since this is not
> directly related with iomap conversion) with a changelog / comment
> explaining why we need to check EXT4_MAP_UNWRITTEN first.
But wouldn't doing so break bisection? Seeing as though we needed to
change this statement specifically to accommodate for the weirdness
being returned from ext4_map_blocks()? i.e. map.m_flags being set to
either of the following:
- (EXT4_MAP_NEW | EXT4_MAP_MAPPED)
or
- (EXT4_MAP_NEW | EXT4_MAP_MAPPED | EXT4_MAP_UNWRITTEN)
So, if we left the statement in its original form, we'd allocate
unwritten extents but never actually get around to converting them in
ext4_dio_write_end_io() as IOMAP_DIO_UNWRITTEN would never be set?
--M
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-29 11:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-12 12:52 [PATCH 0/5] ext4: direct IO via iomap infrastructure Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-12 12:52 ` [PATCH 1/5] ext4: introduce direct IO read code path using " Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-12 17:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-12 20:17 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-08-13 10:45 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-12 12:52 ` [PATCH 2/5] ext4: move inode extension/truncate code out from ext4_iomap_end() Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-12 17:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-13 10:46 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-28 19:59 ` Jan Kara
2019-08-28 21:54 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-29 8:18 ` Jan Kara
2019-08-12 12:53 ` [PATCH 3/5] iomap: modify ->end_io() calling convention Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-12 17:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-13 10:43 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-12 12:53 ` [PATCH 4/5] ext4: introduce direct IO write code path using iomap infrastructure Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-12 17:04 ` RITESH HARJANI
2019-08-13 12:58 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-13 14:35 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-08-14 9:51 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-12 17:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-13 10:45 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-28 20:26 ` Jan Kara
2019-08-28 22:32 ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-29 8:03 ` Jan Kara
2019-08-29 11:47 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-29 11:45 ` Matthew Bobrowski [this message]
2019-08-29 12:38 ` Jan Kara
2019-08-12 12:53 ` [PATCH 5/5] ext4: clean up redundant buffer_head direct IO code Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-12 17:31 ` [PATCH 0/5] ext4: direct IO via iomap infrastructure RITESH HARJANI
2019-08-13 11:10 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-13 12:27 ` RITESH HARJANI
2019-08-14 9:48 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-14 11:58 ` RITESH HARJANI
2019-08-21 13:14 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-22 12:00 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-22 14:11 ` Ritesh Harjani
2019-08-24 3:18 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-24 3:55 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-08-24 23:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-27 9:52 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-28 12:05 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-28 14:27 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-08-28 18:02 ` Jan Kara
2019-08-29 6:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-29 11:20 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-08-29 14:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-23 13:43 ` [RFC 1/1] ext4: PoC implementation of option-1 Ritesh Harjani
2019-08-23 13:49 ` Ritesh Harjani
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=20190829114515.GB2486@poseidon.bobrowski.net \
--to=mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=riteshh@linux.ibm.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).