linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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



             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).