From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>,
Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@linux.ibm.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] ext4: Add atomic writes support for DIO
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 15:01:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241031220147.GG21832@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1730286164.git.ritesh.list@gmail.com>
On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 09:27:37PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
Assuming Ted acks this series, I have a fun question: Can we merge this
for 6.13 alongside the single-fsblock xfs implementation?
And how do we want to merge this? It looks like Jens took only the
first three patches from John's series, leaving this:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-block.git/log/?h=for-6.13/block-atomic
[PATCH v10 4/8] fs: Export generic_atomic_write_valid() John Garry
[PATCH v10 5/8] fs: iomap: Atomic write support John Garry
[PATCH v10 6/8] xfs: Support atomic write for statx John Garry
[PATCH v10 7/8] xfs: Validate atomic writes John Garry
[PATCH v10 8/8] xfs: Support setting FMODE_CAN_ATOMIC_WRITE John Garry
Note the fs and iomap stuff is not in that branch.
So should xfs create a 6.13 merge branch from block-atomic containing
all of its new stuff including the xfs atomic writes changes? And then
I guess merge the ext4 changes too?? ext4 code coming in via xfs, yuck.
Or should cem just create a 6.13 merge branch with everything *except*
the atomic writes stuff? Call that branch "xfs-6.13-merge". Then one
of us with commit privileges creates a separate branch off of
block-atomic, add both the xfs series and then the ext4 series? Call
that branch "fs-atomic-writes".
Then I guess cem could create a third branch from xfs-6.13-merge, merge
the fs-atomic-writes branch into that third branch, and push that third
branch to for-next on git.kernel.org so it can get picked up by
rothwell's for-next and fs-next?
(Note that Ted could do likewise with ext4; cem doesn't have to be part
of this.)
Does that work for people? The "sending multiple branches to linus" way
is the best method I can think of, though it's more release manager
work.
--D
> v2 -> v3:
> ==========
> 1. Patch-1 adds an "experimental" string in dmesg log during mount when EXT4
> detects that it is capable of doing DIO atomic writes on a given device
> with min and max unit details.
> 2. Patch-4 has been updated to avoid returning -ENOTBLK (in ext4_iomap_end)
> if the request belongs to atomic write. This patch also adds a WARN_ON_ONCE()
> if atomic write ever fallback to buffered-io (to catch any unwanted bugs in the future).
> More details in the commit log of patch-4.
> 3. Collected RBs tag from John for Patch 2 & 3.
>
> [v2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ext4/cover.1729944406.git.ritesh.list@gmail.com/
>
> Previous cover letter log:
>
> In v2, we had split the series and this one only takes care of
> atomic writes for single fsblock.
> That means for now this gets only enabled on bs < ps systems on ext4.
> Enablement of atomic writes for bigalloc (multi-fsblock support) is still
> under discussion and may require general consensus within the filesystem
> community [1].
>
> This series adds the base feature support to enable atomic writes in
> direct-io path for ext4. We advertise the minimum and the maximum atomic
> write unit sizes via statx on a regular file.
>
> This series allows users to utilize atomic write support using -
> 1. on bs < ps systems via - mkfs.ext4 -F -b 16384 /dev/sda
>
> This can then be utilized using -
> xfs_io -fdc "pwrite -V 1 -A -b16k 0 16k" /mnt/f1
>
> This is built on top of John's DIO atomic write series for XFS [2].
> The VFS and block layer enablement for atomic writes were merged already.
>
>
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ext4/87jzdvmqfz.fsf@gmail.com
> [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20241019125113.369994-1-john.g.garry@oracle.com/
>
>
> Changelogs:
> ===========
> PATCH -> PATCH v2:
> - addressed review comments from John and Darrick.
> - renamed ext4_sb_info variables names: fs_awu* -> s_awu*
> - [PATCH]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ext4/cover.1729825985.git.ritesh.list@gmail.com/
>
> RFC -> PATCH:
> - Dropped RFC tag
> - Last RFC was posted a while ago but back then a lot of VFS and block layer
> interfaces were still not merged. Those are now merged, thanks to John and
> everyone else.
> - [RFC] - https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ext4/cover.1709356594.git.ritesh.list@gmail.com/
>
>
>
> Ritesh Harjani (IBM) (4):
> ext4: Add statx support for atomic writes
> ext4: Check for atomic writes support in write iter
> ext4: Support setting FMODE_CAN_ATOMIC_WRITE
> ext4: Do not fallback to buffered-io for DIO atomic write
>
> fs/ext4/ext4.h | 9 +++++++++
> fs/ext4/file.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> fs/ext4/inode.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> fs/ext4/super.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 4 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.46.0
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-31 22:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-30 15:57 [PATCH v3 0/4] ext4: Add atomic writes support for DIO Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2024-10-30 15:57 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] ext4: Add statx support for atomic writes Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2024-10-31 21:42 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-11-01 2:30 ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-11-01 3:33 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-10-30 15:57 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] ext4: Check for atomic writes support in write iter Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2024-10-31 21:42 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-10-30 15:57 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] ext4: Support setting FMODE_CAN_ATOMIC_WRITE Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2024-10-31 21:42 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-10-30 15:57 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] ext4: Do not fallback to buffered-io for DIO atomic write Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2024-10-31 21:51 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-11-01 3:11 ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-10-31 22:01 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
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=20241031220147.GG21832@frogsfrogsfrogs \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--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=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