From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Trond Myklebust <trondmy@hammerspace.com>
Subject: Re: posix_fallocate behavior in glibc
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 19:57:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a5i0krml.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240729160951.GA30183@lst.de> (Christoph Hellwig's message of "Mon, 29 Jul 2024 18:09:51 +0200")
* Christoph Hellwig:
> The glibc implementation in sysdeps/posix/posix_fallocate.c, which is
> also by sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/posix_fallocate.c as a fallback if the
> fallocate syscall returns EOPNOTSUPP is implemented by doing single
> byte writes at intervals of min(f.f_bsize, 4096).
> How can we get rid of this glibc fallback that turns the implementations
> non-conformant and increases write amplication for no good reason?
When does the kernel return EOPNOTSUPP these days? We do not even do
fallback for EPERM/ENOSYS, those that might be encountered in
containers.
Last time I looked at this I concluded that it does not make sense to
push this write loop from glibc to the applications. That's what would
happen if we had a new version of posix_fallocate that didn't do those
writes. We also updated the manual:
Storage Allocation
<https://sourceware.org/glibc/manual/latest/html_node/Storage-Allocation.html>
As mentioned, if an application doesn't want fallback behavior, it can
call fallocate directly.
Thanks,
Florian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-29 17:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-29 16:09 posix_fallocate behavior in glibc Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 17:23 ` Paul Eggert
2024-07-29 17:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 17:54 ` Adhemerval Zanella Netto
[not found] ` <CAPBLoAf11hM0PLhqPG5gUyivU9U1manpOOhDWCPugUmWc1VVUw@mail.gmail.com>
2024-07-29 18:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 17:57 ` Florian Weimer [this message]
2024-07-29 18:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 18:52 ` Florian Weimer
2024-07-29 19:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 19:23 ` Florian Weimer
2024-07-30 15:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-30 16:11 ` Paul Eggert
2024-07-30 16:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-30 17:03 ` Florian Weimer
2024-07-30 17:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-30 17:29 ` Florian Weimer
2024-07-30 17:52 ` Mark Wielaard
2024-07-31 2:32 ` Theodore Ts'o
2024-07-29 23:53 ` Dave Chinner
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-06-26 6:01 Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 15:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-29 15:11 ` Sam James
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=87a5i0krml.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com \
--to=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trondmy@hammerspace.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).