From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com>,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] Add XIP support to ext4
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 09:45:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131220164529.GE19166@parisc-linux.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131219234653.GD31386@dastard>
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 10:46:54AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> Then perhaps we need to get rid of the xip_sparse_mutex first? :/
Yeah, already done in my tree. Just finishing up a few other pieces.
> > > And that solves the unwritten extent problem for the IO path. Now we
> > > just need to solve it for the mmap path. That, I suspect will
> > > require a custom .page_mkwrite handler....
> >
> > No, page_mkwrite() never gets called. At this point, I'm thinking a
> > custom ->fault handler that looks something like this:
>
> And that's another difference to the normal filesystem mmap paths.
> .fault is a read-only operation for filesystems and
> .page-mkwrite is the write-fault modification path. i.e.
> .fault is only supposed to populate the page into the page
> cache by reading it from disk via ->readpage(s). It does not do
> block allocation - if the fault is over a hole then a new, zeroed
> page is placed in the page cache regardless of whether it is a read
> or write page fault.
>
> ->page_mkwrite is then used by page fault infrstructure to inform
> filesystem that a write fault has occurred and they may need to
> allocate backing store for the page, or convert unwritten extents to
> written.
>
> What xip_file_fault() does is ask the fielsystem to allocate blocks
> for writeable mappings, rather than just inserting a sparse page
> over holes and unwritten extents. That fails to handle unwritten
> extents correctly - they remain unwritten despite the fact that
> userspace can now write to the page.
I agree with you up to this point. But xip_file_fault() uses the same
get_block_t callback to allocate blocks that block_page_mkwrite() does.
So there's no real difference from the fs' point of view.
> IOWs, xip_file_fault() needs to drop the allocation of blocks and
> only ever insert mappings for pages that have data in them or sprase
> pages for holes and unwritten extents. Then the filesystem needs to
> provide it's own ->page_mkwrite callout to do block allocation and
> unwritten extent conversion on write page faults, and the XIP code
> needs to provide a helper function to replace the sparse page in the
> mappings with the correct page mapped from the backing device after
> allocation or unwritten extent conversion.
>
> That will make XIP behave almost identically to the normal page
> cache based page fault path, requiring only a small addition to the
> filesystem page_mkwrite handler to support XIP...
I decided to see if there was anything particularly hard about the XFS
code in this area. I really think it's just this for you:
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
@@ -957,12 +957,27 @@ xfs_file_readdir(
return 0;
}
+static int xfs_xip_fault(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct vm_fault *vmf)
+{
+ return xip_fault(vma, vmf, xfs_get_blocks);
+}
+
+static const struct vm_operations_struct xfs_xip_vm_ops = {
+ .fault = xfs_xip_fault,
+ .remap_pages = generic_file_remap_pages,
+};
+
STATIC int
xfs_file_mmap(
struct file *filp,
struct vm_area_struct *vma)
{
- vma->vm_ops = &xfs_file_vm_ops;
+ if (IS_XIP(file_inode(filp))) {
+ vma->vm_ops = &xfs_xip_vm_ops;
+ vma->vm_flags |= VM_MIXEDMAP;
+ } else {
+ vma->vm_ops = &xfs_file_vm_ops;
+ }
file_accessed(filp);
return 0;
> > static int ext4_xip_fault(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct vm_fault *vmf)
> > {
> > return xip_fault(vma, vmf, ext4_get_block_write, ext4_end_io_dio);
> > }
>
> I think the xip fault handler should be generic as there's no reason
> for it to do anything other that read-only operations. It's the
> page_mkwrite callout that needs custom code for each filesystem.
With no struct page for the XIP memory, it's just not feasible to do it
that way.
--
Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-20 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-17 19:18 [PATCH v3 0/3] Add XIP support to ext4 Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-17 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] Fix XIP fault vs truncate race Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-17 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] xip: Add xip_zero_page_range Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-17 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] ext4: Add XIP functionality Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-17 22:30 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] Add XIP support to ext4 Dave Chinner
2013-12-18 2:31 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-18 5:01 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-12-18 14:27 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-19 2:07 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-12-19 4:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-19 4:37 ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-19 5:43 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-12-19 15:20 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-19 16:17 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-12-19 17:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-19 17:18 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-12-20 18:17 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-20 19:34 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-12-20 20:11 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-23 3:36 ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-23 3:45 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-23 4:32 ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-23 6:56 ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-23 14:51 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-12-23 3:16 ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-24 16:27 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-18 12:33 ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-18 15:22 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-19 0:48 ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-19 1:05 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-19 1:58 ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-19 15:32 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-19 23:46 ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-20 16:45 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2013-12-23 4:14 ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-18 18:13 ` Eric Sandeen
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=20131220164529.GE19166@parisc-linux.org \
--to=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com \
/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).