From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pj1-f53.google.com (mail-pj1-f53.google.com [209.85.216.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A29318F2F7; Fri, 25 Oct 2024 10:31:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.53 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729852294; cv=none; b=GCovd1HUMVqUZK4bWgbQ52cSCCTJyd/56GQxM2gXM6AzJ+0EmtOn3zUkYJVD3zW5GcOqpsK9s59zoxKNdozDqc5DQNDefx+oqYafZqpp3v/1KdR+K4/NJWEmQYGKF0IyFjd/WQMKI/d195bE9iAuQ1n6xNooC/wY5Wo2uRTQRP4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729852294; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4zV7WJT4ELiuI5eDILdMat1X24qaMlG8dWwZ+Sv55JQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Date:Message-ID:References; b=l71uMXChvNqOuUs8NjpOLsoL+t3pwvoJixS8lQtSv+OtpPw+2xNrIPKlrAS5EzyInLYNBcSCwouc5IAowaqT6fY3b+i7AKBDnhQtBpTLFA97Ze8Yc5ug9Tjh1SsFMnuoDc0qhP5RWt6AexjhFp8rZdqb2OlioH3p4wIdet57QNU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=VEm4Ei+M; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.53 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="VEm4Ei+M" Received: by mail-pj1-f53.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2e2c6bc4840so1405996a91.2; Fri, 25 Oct 2024 03:31:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1729852291; x=1730457091; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=references:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=M5FWy0HuR7v5dZxwHvlOpN27R8/7jfpqMcRsd5csqOk=; b=VEm4Ei+MVc90GVcIcnfLGty3AMDfjPdJEOyLtZOTpVsGt2T+LkHhowor1FmuTClIZl msZLs0YfWqB/asEnIBikITRKNl8m6u/FjPMlXFwvqy3oumZJiMB+tU8SQxVldCr8ySP5 cDHyMmna7nk3stM24sa3bIiD8CFiwMVrixB5TNO5GxDnr/e42PMalKzT4I8JNU90XVXB dDr2MOyCCwubWqnEcpmDcAZKn74krCKcmvTGJGS/ANgU7r8+8UYH2PDAqwNE04bzl2fP DEZAz8Gxl+ZU0iDIZcoZHmSmpMV4S7yyaDZgehvZCJdw/xZmreFkwYn5Dehq7FjhFW3m HGxQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1729852291; x=1730457091; h=references:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=M5FWy0HuR7v5dZxwHvlOpN27R8/7jfpqMcRsd5csqOk=; b=lvqNyN1syqu+PF0hzFoNjPYixko4BzBzyZlCp7GK47D2Q+XlHf0xbJ9SPcqgepdgbA 59V2u7pSBDtuIZsvtTPfAm6RqtMnbyht9le5KGLgLTueb4x4f3EmcPhPSmt9w8ZzODvi iJwFeZTg/ZRvYdcWR440CzPrykWMgbwAyf8LfiKPT+GXhiwC/Yu8NtdSffLv/e0pMIyL P06iJ5lxpTf6cOMnhTANfs0dZjMweJEGlAkMxQjGvYXDWn6yH4nQe7Azhnle/dHTFW5h igiorn8TXZ6lmU4EErh1K+ZIwnX4wY2i8Vvj/bla5kPzKQQc8Z7O3VTnmmAU//k1nScH db6Q== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUT9XVUCvexpxIxIXtw0TJbIFiItQDCVE+RWHUFruQKYzHQCQrPK1GQZdszJeAbOrBb1zwmH0FvkV3u6XvVFw==@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCVM0XVUnbxKJdtK7GMbBa2sBx7fCJlm2wVFdwx6bbADz/oRiJ7jukmTTcVeL2IL/iNv+87KzSSfGUgfQGuN@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCWO2LI8k8Pp3Q5FkkQwqiJe735H2MqsDkWkcrr3YPRZWSfIfq0ytWEYEZpzHHgb6FxLMyX1WSeA5GAL@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCWvGA63Q27heehhWkqU8FDo8J37BCNvPwAKnSujAeiESMqRx0IHkcfmwmBLFLCVPQ4oF+8tjvHMBijB@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyGZqhVZNNYypuKdTxabXvO6dwnHD9zxdvroxqw52diMhThJr// FFKHPFPd4OI9B1aoJzyuK1TUXcqoem6muPYw9NviFmhR5gOqE0+6p08Ybg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHe2Og/h4J/9K7wPAUbvNeMIUE/QeOXAGkhYIaERrZuTxDyFslREse4P/jzV6Q1na4nSSvx/Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:9e2:b0:2c9:b72:7a1f with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2e76b6e21a9mr9885734a91.28.1729852290824; Fri, 25 Oct 2024 03:31:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dw-tp ([171.76.85.20]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 98e67ed59e1d1-2e8e3572d4esm1075097a91.15.2024.10.25.03.31.27 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 25 Oct 2024 03:31:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) To: John Garry , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Cc: Theodore Ts'o , Jan Kara , "Darrick J . Wong" , Christoph Hellwig , Ojaswin Mujoo , Dave Chinner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] ext4: Add statx support for atomic writes In-Reply-To: <314835ec-98bf-472c-8be7-0b26e50cfc9b@oracle.com> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 15:38:03 +0530 Message-ID: <87y12cmr5o.fsf@gmail.com> References: <314835ec-98bf-472c-8be7-0b26e50cfc9b@oracle.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: John Garry writes: > On 25/10/2024 04:45, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote: >> This patch adds base support for atomic writes via statx getattr. >> On bs < ps systems, we can create FS with say bs of 16k. That means >> both atomic write min and max unit can be set to 16k for supporting >> atomic writes. >> >> Later patches adds support for bigalloc as well so that ext4 can also >> support doing atomic writes for bs = ps systems. >> >> Co-developed-by: Ojaswin Mujoo >> Signed-off-by: Ojaswin Mujoo >> Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) >> --- >> fs/ext4/ext4.h | 7 ++++++- >> fs/ext4/inode.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ >> fs/ext4/super.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4.h b/fs/ext4/ext4.h >> index 44b0d418143c..a41e56c2c628 100644 >> --- a/fs/ext4/ext4.h >> +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4.h >> @@ -1729,6 +1729,10 @@ struct ext4_sb_info { >> */ >> struct work_struct s_sb_upd_work; >> >> + /* Atomic write unit values */ >> + unsigned int fs_awu_min; >> + unsigned int fs_awu_max; >> + >> /* Ext4 fast commit sub transaction ID */ >> atomic_t s_fc_subtid; >> >> @@ -1820,7 +1824,8 @@ static inline int ext4_valid_inum(struct super_block *sb, unsigned long ino) >> */ >> enum { >> EXT4_MF_MNTDIR_SAMPLED, >> - EXT4_MF_FC_INELIGIBLE /* Fast commit ineligible */ >> + EXT4_MF_FC_INELIGIBLE, /* Fast commit ineligible */ >> + EXT4_MF_ATOMIC_WRITE /* Supports atomic write */ > > Does this flag really buy us much? > I felt it is cleaner this way than comparing non-zero values of fs_awu_min and fs_awu_max. Now that you pointed at it - Maybe a question for others who might have the history of which one to use when - or do we think there is a scope of merging the two into just one as a later cleanup? I know that s_mount_flags was added for fastcommit and it needed the state manipulations to be done in atomic way. Similarly s_ext4_flags also was renamed from s_resize_flags for more general purpose use. Both of these looks like could be merged isn't it? >> }; >> >> static inline void ext4_set_mount_flag(struct super_block *sb, int bit) >> diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c >> index 54bdd4884fe6..897c028d5bc9 100644 >> --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c >> +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c >> @@ -5578,6 +5578,20 @@ int ext4_getattr(struct mnt_idmap *idmap, const struct path *path, >> } >> } >> >> + if (S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) && (request_mask & STATX_WRITE_ATOMIC)) { >> + struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb); >> + unsigned int awu_min, awu_max; >> + >> + if (ext4_test_mount_flag(inode->i_sb, EXT4_MF_ATOMIC_WRITE)) { > > I'd use ext4_inode_can_atomicwrite() here, similar to what is done for xfs > Sure since it is inode operation, we can check against ext4_inode_can_atomicwrite(). >> + awu_min = sbi->fs_awu_min; >> + awu_max = sbi->fs_awu_max; >> + } else { >> + awu_min = awu_max = 0; >> + } >> + >> + generic_fill_statx_atomic_writes(stat, awu_min, awu_max); >> + } >> + >> flags = ei->i_flags & EXT4_FL_USER_VISIBLE; >> if (flags & EXT4_APPEND_FL) >> stat->attributes |= STATX_ATTR_APPEND; >> diff --git a/fs/ext4/super.c b/fs/ext4/super.c >> index 16a4ce704460..f5c075aff060 100644 >> --- a/fs/ext4/super.c >> +++ b/fs/ext4/super.c >> @@ -4425,6 +4425,37 @@ static int ext4_handle_clustersize(struct super_block *sb) >> return 0; >> } >> >> +/*