From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, darrick.wong@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] xfs: go straight to real allocations for direct I/O COW writes
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 11:17:20 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170124161719.GE60234@bfoster.bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170124150959.GA27705@lst.de>
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 04:09:59PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:02:22AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> > Ok, well then I'm probably not going to be able to follow the details
> > well enough to try and provide constructive feedback without seeing the
> > code. Looking back, my comments were generally about the tradeoff of
> > bypassing the extent size hint mechanism that has been built into
> > reflink to avoid cow fragmention.
>
> Ok - really very little change here - only the call to the extsize
> alignment in xfs_bmap_btalloc reinstated and the according reservation
> changes in the caller.
>
> Note that with the previously posted series there is no change in
> handling the cowextsize hint for real on-disk allocations. While
> the current code rounds down based on the cowextsize for creating
> the delayed extent we will never convert the alignment before the
> write start to a real extent - it will just get cleaned up later
> at inode eviction time or using the timer.
>
I thought that while not necessarily guaranteed, generally the entire
extent gets converted from delalloc to real blocks. IIRC, that's what
I've seen in the past when looking into the cow fork with bmap. After
all, isn't that the point of the extent size hint? Allocate wider than
the write to accommodate potential subsequent writes into a more
contiguous range.
> > Without seeing the code, perhaps we need to pull up the cow extent size
> > hint mechanism from the bmapi layer to something similar to how
> > xfs_iomap_direct_write() handles the traditional extent size hints..?
> > That may allow us to more intelligently consider the current state
> > across the data and cow forks in such cases (to not preallocate over
> > existing blocks, for example, without having to kill off the extent size
> > hint entirely).
>
> We could. On the other hand I'd love to get the current series in
> first as the only thing it change in behavior is not allocating
> additional delayed extent space that never gets used, and not writing
> data twice if it's sub-blocksize, all of which seem like a clear
> improvement. And it's also the base for my pending DAX reflink support.
Fair enough, that's a different discussion. Personally, I'd prefer to
fix up the stuff we know that needs fixing before piling more stuff on
top. Particularly since something like cow I/O to a reflinked vm image
file (taking full advantage of cowextszhint) might be a more common use
case than DAX reflink at the moment.
All of this stuff is "experimental," however, so I don't feel strongly
about the order so long as we agree the regression can/should be fixed
up. So I'll defer to the maintainer on that one. ;)
Brian
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-24 16:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-05 21:05 reflink COW improvements Christoph Hellwig
2016-12-05 21:05 ` [PATCH 1/3] xfs: reject all unaligned direct writes to reflinked files Christoph Hellwig
2016-12-07 18:59 ` Brian Foster
2016-12-05 21:05 ` [PATCH 2/3] xfs: go straight to real allocations for direct I/O COW writes Christoph Hellwig
2016-12-07 19:00 ` Brian Foster
2016-12-07 19:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-12-07 19:46 ` Brian Foster
2016-12-08 4:23 ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-01-24 8:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-01-24 13:50 ` Brian Foster
2017-01-24 13:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-01-24 15:02 ` Brian Foster
2017-01-24 15:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-01-24 16:17 ` Brian Foster [this message]
2017-01-24 16:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-01-24 17:43 ` Brian Foster
2017-01-24 20:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-01-24 20:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-01-25 0:09 ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-01-27 17:44 ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-01-27 17:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-12-05 21:05 ` [PATCH 3/3] xfs: allocate direct I/O COW blocks in iomap_begin Christoph Hellwig
2016-12-06 2:09 ` reflink COW improvements Darrick J. Wong
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=20170124161719.GE60234@bfoster.bfoster \
--to=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-xfs@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).