linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com>
To: jack@suse.cz, tytso@mit.edu, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org,
	riteshh@linux.ibm.com, joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com
Subject: [PATCHv4 3/3] ext4: Move to shared i_rwsem even without dioread_nolock mount opt
Date: Thu,  5 Dec 2019 19:16:05 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191205134605.2593-1-riteshh@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191205120529.GB32639@quack2.suse.cz>

We were using shared locking only in case of dioread_nolock mount option in case
of DIO overwrites. This mount condition is not needed anymore with current code,
since:-

1. No race between buffered writes & DIO overwrites. Since buffIO writes takes
exclusive lock & DIO overwrites will take shared locking. Also DIO path will
make sure to flush and wait for any dirty page cache data.

2. No race between buffered reads & DIO overwrites, since there is no block
allocation that is possible with DIO overwrites. So no stale data exposure
should happen. Same is the case between DIO reads & DIO overwrites.

3. Also other paths like truncate is protected, since we wait there for any DIO
in flight to be over.

Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com>
---
 fs/ext4/file.c | 9 +++------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/file.c b/fs/ext4/file.c
index cbafaec9e4fc..682ed956eb02 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/file.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/file.c
@@ -392,8 +392,8 @@ static const struct iomap_dio_ops ext4_dio_write_ops = {
  * - For extending writes case we don't take the shared lock, since it requires
  *   updating inode i_disksize and/or orphan handling with exclusive lock.
  *
- * - shared locking will only be true mostly with overwrites in dioread_nolock
- *   mode. Otherwise we will switch to exclusive i_rwsem lock.
+ * - shared locking will only be true mostly with overwrites. Otherwise we will
+ *   switch to exclusive i_rwsem lock.
  */
 static ssize_t ext4_dio_write_checks(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from,
 				     bool *ilock_shared, bool *extend)
@@ -415,14 +415,11 @@ static ssize_t ext4_dio_write_checks(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from,
 		*extend = true;
 	/*
 	 * Determine whether the IO operation will overwrite allocated
-	 * and initialized blocks. If so, check to see whether it is
-	 * possible to take the dioread_nolock path.
-	 *
+	 * and initialized blocks.
 	 * We need exclusive i_rwsem for changing security info
 	 * in file_modified().
 	 */
 	if (*ilock_shared && (!IS_NOSEC(inode) || *extend ||
-	     !ext4_should_dioread_nolock(inode) ||
 	     !ext4_overwrite_io(inode, offset, count))) {
 		inode_unlock_shared(inode);
 		*ilock_shared = false;
-- 
2.21.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-12-05 13:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-05  6:46 [PATCHv4 0/3] Fix inode_lock sequence to scale performance of DIO mixed R/W workload Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-05  6:46 ` [PATCHv4 1/3] ext4: fix ext4_dax_read/write inode locking sequence for IOCB_NOWAIT Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-05  6:46 ` [PATCHv4 2/3] ext4: Start with shared i_rwsem in case of DIO instead of exclusive Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-05 12:03   ` Jan Kara
2019-12-05 13:40     ` Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-05  6:46 ` [PATCHv4 3/3] ext4: Move to shared i_rwsem even without dioread_nolock mount opt Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-05 12:05   ` Jan Kara
2019-12-05 13:41     ` Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-05 13:46     ` Ritesh Harjani [this message]
2019-12-06  8:46 ` [PATCHv4 0/3] Fix inode_lock sequence to scale performance of DIO mixed R/W workload Joseph Qi
2019-12-06  8:49   ` 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=20191205134605.2593-1-riteshh@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=riteshh@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org \
    --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).