From: Robert S Peterson <rpeterso@redhat.com>
To: fs-devel mailing list <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cam.ac.uk>
Subject: [patch] loop.c to use write ops for fs requiring special locking
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 10:48:57 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1141231737.15117.88.camel@technetium.msp.redhat.com> (raw)
Hi All,
Below is a small patch to loop.c I'd like to see in the kernel.
This is an extension of Anton Altaparmakov's previous fix which allows
loop.c to use the aop->write rather than prepare_write/commit_write if
prepare_write/commit_write aren't available.
Right now, the current loop.c uses aop->prepare_write/commit_write
unless there is no other option. However, due to special locking
requirements, some backing filesystems may prefer the use of aop->write
rather than prepare_write/commit_write. Since loop.c does not have
advisory locking, the backing fs should have a choice of which to use.
In the case of GFS, for example, loop.c's use of aop->prepare_write
circumvents proper cluster locking and transaction building, so using
aop->write is the right thing for loop.c to do.
How the patch works:
If the backing filesystem has special locking requirements (new flag in
fs_flags) loop.c uses aop->write rather than prepare_write/commit_write.
Feedback?
Regards,
Bob Peterson
rpeterso@redhat.com
--- linux-2.6.15.4.orig/drivers/block/loop.c 2006-02-10
01:22:48.000000000 -0600
+++ linux-2.6.15.4.patched/drivers/block/loop.c 2006-03-01
09:38:48.000000000 -0600
@@ -44,6 +44,11 @@
* backing filesystem.
* Anton Altaparmakov, 16 Feb 2005
*
+ * Extension of Anton's idea: Use normal write file operations rather
+ * than prepare_write and commit_write when the backing filesystem
+ * requires special locking.
+ * Robert Peterson <rpeterso@redhat.com>, 01 Mar 2006
+ *
* Still To Fix:
* - Advisory locking is ignored here.
* - Should use an own CAP_* category instead of CAP_SYS_ADMIN
@@ -74,6 +79,7 @@
#include <linux/completion.h>
#include <linux/highmem.h>
#include <linux/gfp.h>
+#include <linux/mount.h>
#include <asm/uaccess.h>
@@ -781,7 +787,8 @@ static int loop_set_fd(struct loop_devic
*/
if (!file->f_op->sendfile)
goto out_putf;
- if (aops->prepare_write && aops->commit_write)
+ if (!(file->f_vfsmnt->mnt_sb->s_type->fs_flags &
FS_REQUIRES_LOCKING) &&
+ aops->prepare_write && aops->commit_write)
lo_flags |= LO_FLAGS_USE_AOPS;
if (!(lo_flags & LO_FLAGS_USE_AOPS) && !
file->f_op->write)
lo_flags |= LO_FLAGS_READ_ONLY;
diff -pur linux-2.6.15.4.orig/include/linux/fs.h
linux-2.6.15.4.patched/include/linux/fs.h
--- linux-2.6.15.4.orig/include/linux/fs.h 2006-02-10
01:22:48.000000000 -0600
+++ linux-2.6.15.4.patched/include/linux/fs.h 2006-02-28
17:18:48.000000000 -0600
@@ -83,6 +83,7 @@ extern int dir_notify_enable;
/* public flags for file_system_type */
#define FS_REQUIRES_DEV 1
#define FS_BINARY_MOUNTDATA 2
+#define FS_REQUIRES_LOCKING 4 /* Filesystem requires locking */
#define FS_REVAL_DOT 16384 /* Check the paths ".", ".." for
staleness */
#define FS_ODD_RENAME 32768 /* Temporary stuff; will go away as soon
* as nfs_rename() will be cleaned up
next reply other threads:[~2006-03-01 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-01 16:48 Robert S Peterson [this message]
2006-03-01 22:09 ` [patch] loop.c to use write ops for fs requiring special locking Andrew Morton
2006-03-02 10:16 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2006-03-10 23:04 ` Robert S Peterson
2006-03-10 23:13 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-11 0:36 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2006-03-24 17:07 ` [patch 2.6.16] loop.c to use write ops for fs requiring special locking [try #2] Robert S Peterson
2006-03-24 19:46 ` Anton Altaparmakov
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-03-27 21:52 [PATCH] loop.c to use write ops for fs requiring special locking Robert S Peterson
2006-03-28 0:44 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-28 15:33 ` Robert S Peterson
2006-03-28 19:27 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-28 14:40 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-03-28 15:59 ` Robert S Peterson
2006-03-29 9:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-03-30 0:10 ` Robert S Peterson
2006-03-30 14:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=1141231737.15117.88.camel@technetium.msp.redhat.com \
--to=rpeterso@redhat.com \
--cc=aia21@cam.ac.uk \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
/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).