From: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>,
axboe@kernel.dk, kbusch@kernel.org, hch@lst.de, sagi@grimberg.me,
jejb@linux.ibm.com, djwong@kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
brauner@kernel.org, chandan.babu@oracle.com, dchinner@redhat.com,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, jbongio@google.com,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/21] block: Add fops atomic write support
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2023 14:17:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <yq1ttr6qoqp.fsf@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <34c08488-a288-45f9-a28f-a514a408541d@acm.org> (Bart Van Assche's message of "Wed, 4 Oct 2023 10:22:23 -0700")
Hi Bart!
> In other words, also for the above example it is guaranteed that
> writes of a single logical block (512 bytes) are atomic, no matter
> what value is reported as the ATOMIC TRANSFER LENGTH GRANULARITY.
There is no formal guarantee that a disk drive sector read-modify-write
operation results in a readable sector after a power failure. We have
definitely seen blocks being mangled in the field.
Wrt. supporting SCSI atomic block operations, the device rejects the
WRITE ATOMIC(16) command if you attempt to use a transfer length smaller
than the reported granularity. If we want to support WRITE ATOMIC(16) we
have to abide by the values reported by the device. It is not optional.
Besides, the whole point of this patch set is to increase the
"observable atomic block size" beyond the physical block size to
facilitate applications that prefer to use blocks in the 8-64KB range.
IOW, using the logical block size is not particularly interesting. The
objective is to prevent tearing of much larger blocks.
> How about aligning the features of the two protocols as much as
> possible? My understanding is that all long-term T10 contributors are
> all in favor of this.
That is exactly what this patch set does. Out of the 5-6 different
"atomic" modes of operation permitted by SCSI and NVMe, our exposed
semantics are carefully chosen to permit all compliant devices to be
used. Based on only two reported queue limits (FWIW, we started with way
more than that. I believe that complexity was part of the first RFC we
posted). Whereas this series hides most of the complexity in the various
unfortunate protocol quirks behind a simple interface: Your tear-proof
writes can't be smaller than X bytes and larger than Y bytes and they
must be naturally aligned. This simplified things substantially from an
application perspective.
--
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-04 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 124+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-29 10:27 [PATCH 00/21] block atomic writes John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 01/21] block: Add atomic write operations to request_queue limits John Garry
2023-10-03 16:40 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-04 3:00 ` Martin K. Petersen
2023-10-04 17:28 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-04 18:26 ` Martin K. Petersen
2023-10-04 21:00 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-05 8:22 ` John Garry
2023-11-09 15:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-11-09 17:01 ` John Garry
2023-11-10 6:23 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-11-10 9:04 ` John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 02/21] block: Limit atomic writes according to bio and queue limits John Garry
2023-11-09 15:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-11-09 17:41 ` John Garry
2023-12-04 3:19 ` Ming Lei
2023-12-04 3:55 ` Ming Lei
2023-12-04 9:35 ` John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 03/21] fs/bdev: Add atomic write support info to statx John Garry
2023-09-29 22:49 ` Eric Biggers
2023-10-01 13:23 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-02 9:51 ` John Garry
2023-10-02 18:39 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-03 0:28 ` Martin K. Petersen
2023-11-09 15:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-10-03 1:51 ` Dave Chinner
2023-10-03 2:57 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-10-03 7:23 ` John Garry
2023-10-03 15:46 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-10-04 14:19 ` John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 04/21] fs: Add RWF_ATOMIC and IOCB_ATOMIC flags for atomic write support John Garry
2023-10-06 18:15 ` Jeremy Bongio
2023-10-09 22:02 ` Dave Chinner
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 05/21] block: Add REQ_ATOMIC flag John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 06/21] block: Pass blk_queue_get_max_sectors() a request pointer John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 07/21] block: Limit atomic write IO size according to atomic_write_max_sectors John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 08/21] block: Error an attempt to split an atomic write bio John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 09/21] block: Add checks to merging of atomic writes John Garry
2023-09-30 13:40 ` kernel test robot
2023-10-02 22:50 ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-10-04 11:40 ` John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 10/21] block: Add fops atomic write support John Garry
2023-09-29 17:51 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-02 10:10 ` John Garry
2023-10-02 19:12 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-03 0:48 ` Martin K. Petersen
2023-10-03 16:55 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-04 2:53 ` Martin K. Petersen
2023-10-04 17:22 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-04 18:17 ` Martin K. Petersen [this message]
2023-10-05 17:10 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-05 22:36 ` Dave Chinner
2023-10-05 22:58 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-06 4:31 ` Dave Chinner
2023-10-06 17:22 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-07 1:21 ` Martin K. Petersen
2023-10-03 8:37 ` John Garry
2023-10-03 16:45 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-04 9:14 ` John Garry
2023-10-04 17:34 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-04 21:59 ` Dave Chinner
2023-12-04 2:30 ` Ming Lei
2023-12-04 9:27 ` John Garry
2023-12-04 12:18 ` Ming Lei
2023-12-04 13:13 ` John Garry
2023-12-05 1:45 ` Ming Lei
2023-12-05 10:49 ` John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 11/21] fs: xfs: Don't use low-space allocator for alignment > 1 John Garry
2023-10-03 1:16 ` Dave Chinner
2023-10-03 3:00 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-10-03 4:34 ` Dave Chinner
2023-10-03 10:22 ` John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 12/21] fs: xfs: Introduce FORCEALIGN inode flag John Garry
2023-11-09 15:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 13/21] fs: xfs: Make file data allocations observe the 'forcealign' flag John Garry
2023-10-03 1:42 ` Dave Chinner
2023-10-03 10:13 ` John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 14/21] fs: xfs: Enable file data forcealign feature John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 15/21] fs: xfs: Support atomic write for statx John Garry
2023-10-03 3:32 ` Dave Chinner
2023-10-03 10:56 ` John Garry
2023-10-03 16:10 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 16/21] fs: iomap: Atomic write support John Garry
2023-10-03 4:24 ` Dave Chinner
2023-10-03 12:55 ` John Garry
2023-10-03 16:47 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-10-04 1:16 ` Dave Chinner
2023-10-24 12:59 ` John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 17/21] fs: xfs: iomap atomic " John Garry
2023-11-09 15:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-11-10 10:42 ` John Garry
2023-11-28 8:56 ` John Garry
2023-11-28 13:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-11-28 17:42 ` John Garry
2023-11-29 2:45 ` Martin K. Petersen
2023-12-04 13:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-04 15:19 ` John Garry
2023-12-04 15:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-04 18:06 ` John Garry
2023-12-05 4:55 ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-12-05 11:09 ` John Garry
2023-12-05 13:59 ` Ming Lei
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 18/21] scsi: sd: Support reading atomic properties from block limits VPD John Garry
2023-09-29 17:54 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-02 11:27 ` John Garry
2023-10-06 17:52 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-06 23:48 ` Martin K. Petersen
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 19/21] scsi: sd: Add WRITE_ATOMIC_16 support John Garry
2023-09-29 17:59 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-02 11:36 ` John Garry
2023-10-02 19:21 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 20/21] scsi: scsi_debug: Atomic write support John Garry
2023-09-29 10:27 ` [PATCH 21/21] nvme: Support atomic writes John Garry
[not found] ` <CGME20231004113943eucas1p23a51ce5ef06c36459f826101bb7b85fc@eucas1p2.samsung.com>
2023-10-04 11:39 ` Pankaj Raghav
2023-10-05 10:24 ` John Garry
2023-10-05 13:32 ` Pankaj Raghav
2023-10-05 15:05 ` John Garry
2023-11-09 15:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-11-09 15:42 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-11-09 15:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-11-09 19:08 ` John Garry
2023-11-10 6:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-11-10 8:44 ` John Garry
2023-09-29 14:58 ` [PATCH 00/21] block " Bart Van Assche
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=yq1ttr6qoqp.fsf@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com \
--to=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=chandan.babu@oracle.com \
--cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jbongio@google.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).