From: Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@redhat.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Gionatan Danti <g.danti@assyoma.it>, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Block size and read-modify-write
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 09:19:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180103081916.3mpadfsdkk2bh2ph@odin.usersys.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180103011926.GJ5858@dastard>
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 12:19:26PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 11:25:39AM +0100, Carlos Maiolino wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 12:14:14AM +0100, Gionatan Danti wrote:
> > > Hi list,
> > > I would ask a question: how XFS block size affect read-modify-write in case
> > > of very small writes?
> > >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > > For example, suppose an XFS filesystem with the default 4K data block size.
> > > Am I correct saying that:
> > > - a 512B normal, cached writes will cause a read-modify-write of the entire
> > > 4K sector?
>
> Cached writes smaller than a *page* will cause RMW cycles in the
> page cache, regardless of the block size of the filesystem.
>
> > > - a 512B O_DIRECT write will *not* cause a read-modify-write of the 4K
> > > sector, rather it will be flushed to disk as-is (512 bytes in length)?
>
> Ok, there is a difference between *sector size* and *filesystem
> block size*. You seem to be using them interchangably in your
> question, and that's not correct.
>
> > IIRC, although the DIO requirement is to have writes aligned to the logical sector
> > size, issuing such IOs not properly aligned with the filesystem block size, have
> > a few consequences.
> >
> > - It will require exclusive inode io locks, so serializing IOs to the inode
>
> That is correct, but....
>
> > - And yes, it will require a RMW to the block in question, all IO are always
> > made in filesystem block size units.
>
> .... this is not correct for direct IO. The direct IO path does not
> do RMW cycles at all.
>
> Put simply: a 512B DIO write on a (real or emulated) 512B sector
> device with a 4k FSB will be serialised by the filesystem and do a
> single 512B sector write to the device. However, if the device
> reports as a 4k sector device then a 512B DIO write will be rejected
> by the filesystem because sub-sector IO is not possible.
Oh, thanks for the correction :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com
> --
> 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
--
Carlos
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-03 8:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-28 23:14 Block size and read-modify-write Gionatan Danti
2018-01-02 10:25 ` Carlos Maiolino
2018-01-03 1:19 ` Dave Chinner
2018-01-03 8:19 ` Carlos Maiolino [this message]
2018-01-03 14:54 ` Gionatan Danti
2018-01-03 21:47 ` Dave Chinner
2018-01-03 22:09 ` Gionatan Danti
2018-01-03 22:59 ` Dave Chinner
2018-01-04 1:38 ` Gionatan Danti
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=20180103081916.3mpadfsdkk2bh2ph@odin.usersys.redhat.com \
--to=cmaiolino@redhat.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=g.danti@assyoma.it \
--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).