From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
Cc: brauner@kernel.org, cem@kernel.org, dchinner@redhat.com,
hch@lst.de, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ojaswin@linux.ibm.com, ritesh.list@gmail.com,
martin.petersen@oracle.com, tytso@mit.edu,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/11] xfs: Reflink CoW-based atomic write support
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 09:37:50 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250225173750.GE6242@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e1aa10da-046b-48a8-bb49-f494a5a2b383@oracle.com>
On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 10:58:56AM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> On 24/02/2025 20:32, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 01:56:14PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> > > For CoW-based atomic write support, always allocate a cow hole in
> > > xfs_reflink_allocate_cow() to write the new data.
> > >
> > > The semantics is that if @atomic is set, we will be passed a CoW fork
> > > extent mapping for no error returned.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
> > > ---
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c | 2 +-
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_reflink.c | 12 +++++++-----
> > > fs/xfs/xfs_reflink.h | 2 +-
> > > 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c
> > > index d61460309a78..ab79f0080288 100644
> > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c
> > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c
> > > @@ -865,7 +865,7 @@ xfs_direct_write_iomap_begin(
> > > /* may drop and re-acquire the ilock */
> > > error = xfs_reflink_allocate_cow(ip, &imap, &cmap, &shared,
> > > &lockmode,
> > > - (flags & IOMAP_DIRECT) || IS_DAX(inode));
> > > + (flags & IOMAP_DIRECT) || IS_DAX(inode), false);
> >
> > Now I'm /really/ think it's time for some reflink allocation flags,
> > because the function signature now involves two booleans...
>
> ok, but the @convert_now arg is passed to other functions from
> xfs_reflink_allocate_cow() - so would you prefer to create a bool
> @convert_now inside xfs_reflink_allocate_cow() and pass that bool as before?
> Or pass the flags all the way down to end users of @convert_now?
>
> >
> > > if (error)
> > > goto out_unlock;
> > > if (shared)
> > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_reflink.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_reflink.c
> > > index 8428f7b26ee6..3dab3ba900a3 100644
> > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_reflink.c
> > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_reflink.c
> > > @@ -435,7 +435,8 @@ xfs_reflink_fill_cow_hole(
> > > struct xfs_bmbt_irec *cmap,
> > > bool *shared,
> > > uint *lockmode,
> > > - bool convert_now)
> > > + bool convert_now,
> > > + bool atomic)
> >
> > ...but this can come later.
>
> Do you mean that this would just be a new flag to set?
Sorry, I meant that the double booleans -> flags conversion could be a
cleanup patch at the end of the series. But first we'd have to figure
out where we want the flags boundaries to be -- do we just pass the
IOMAP_{DIRECT,DAX,ATOMIC_*} flags directly to the reflink code and let
it figure out what to do? Or do we make the xfs_iomap.c code translate
that into XFS_REFLINK_ALLOC_* flags?
Either way, that is not something that needs to be done in this patch.
> > Also, is atomic==true only for the> ATOMIC_SW operation?
>
> Right, so I think that the variable (or new flag) can be renamed for that.
>
> > I think so, but that's the unfortunate thing about
> > booleans.
> >
> > > {
> > > struct xfs_mount *mp = ip->i_mount;
> > > struct xfs_trans *tp;
> > > @@ -466,7 +467,7 @@ xfs_reflink_fill_cow_hole(
> > > *lockmode = XFS_ILOCK_EXCL;
> > > error = xfs_find_trim_cow_extent(ip, imap, cmap, shared, &found);
> > > - if (error || !*shared)
> > > + if (error || (!*shared && !atomic))
> > > goto out_trans_cancel;
> > > if (found) {
> > > @@ -566,7 +567,8 @@ xfs_reflink_allocate_cow(
> > > struct xfs_bmbt_irec *cmap,
> > > bool *shared,
> > > uint *lockmode,
> > > - bool convert_now)
> > > + bool convert_now,
> > > + bool atomic)
> >
> > Nit: ^ space before tab.
>
> ok
>
> >
> > If the answer to the question above is 'yes' then with that nit fixed,
> > Reviewed-by: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
>
> Thanks, but I will wait for your feedback to decide whether to pick that up.
>
> John
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-25 17:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-13 13:56 [PATCH v2 00/11] large atomic writes for xfs with CoW John Garry
2025-02-13 13:56 ` [PATCH v2 01/11] iomap: Rename IOMAP_ATOMIC -> IOMAP_ATOMIC_HW John Garry
2025-02-24 20:23 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-13 13:56 ` [PATCH v2 02/11] xfs: Switch atomic write size check in xfs_file_write_iter() John Garry
2025-02-24 20:24 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-13 13:56 ` [PATCH v2 03/11] xfs: Refactor xfs_reflink_end_cow_extent() John Garry
2025-02-24 20:26 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-25 10:01 ` John Garry
2025-02-25 17:29 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-13 13:56 ` [PATCH v2 04/11] iomap: Support CoW-based atomic writes John Garry
2025-02-24 19:59 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-25 10:19 ` John Garry
2025-02-25 17:33 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-13 13:56 ` [PATCH v2 05/11] iomap: Lift blocksize restriction on " John Garry
2025-02-13 13:56 ` [PATCH v2 06/11] xfs: Reflink CoW-based atomic write support John Garry
2025-02-24 20:32 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-25 10:58 ` John Garry
2025-02-25 17:37 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2025-02-25 18:02 ` John Garry
2025-02-13 13:56 ` [PATCH v2 07/11] xfs: iomap " John Garry
2025-02-24 20:13 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-25 11:06 ` John Garry
2025-02-25 17:47 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-25 18:07 ` John Garry
2025-02-13 13:56 ` [PATCH v2 08/11] xfs: Add xfs_file_dio_write_atomic() John Garry
2025-02-24 20:32 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-13 13:56 ` [PATCH v2 09/11] xfs: Commit CoW-based atomic writes atomically John Garry
2025-02-24 20:20 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-25 11:11 ` John Garry
2025-02-25 17:50 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-25 18:07 ` John Garry
2025-02-13 13:56 ` [PATCH v2 10/11] xfs: Update atomic write max size John Garry
2025-02-24 20:34 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-25 11:13 ` John Garry
2025-02-13 13:56 ` [PATCH v2 11/11] xfs: Allow block allocator to take an alignment hint John Garry
2025-02-24 20:37 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-25 11:17 ` John Garry
2025-02-20 7:48 ` [PATCH v2 00/11] large atomic writes for xfs with CoW John Garry
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=20250225173750.GE6242@frogsfrogsfrogs \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=cem@kernel.org \
--cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=ojaswin@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.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