From: Viacheslav Dubeyko <vdubeyko@redhat.com>
To: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@ionos.com>,
idryomov@gmail.com, amarkuze@redhat.com,
ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, dhowells@redhat.com,
pc@manguebit.org, netfs@lists.linux.dev,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ceph: do not fill fscache for RWF_DONTCACHE writeback
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2026 12:44:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dc807d60a59d18dca7a14256285b1cfdeb13d907.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260401205613.2095623-1-max.kellermann@ionos.com>
On Wed, 2026-04-01 at 22:56 +0200, Max Kellermann wrote:
> Avoid populating the local fscache with writeback from dropbehind
> folios.
>
The idea sounds reasonable enough. However, this patch cannot be standalone
because it depends on another one.
I assume that a filesystem must declare DONTCACHE feature support by setting
FOP_DONTCACHE in its file_operations.fop_flags. Am I right here?
And what's about the IOCB_DONTCACHE. As far as I can see,
write_begin_get_folio() translates IOCB_DONTCACHE into FGP_DONTCACHE:
static inline struct folio *write_begin_get_folio(const struct kiocb *iocb,
struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t index, size_t len)
{
fgf_t fgp_flags = FGP_WRITEBEGIN;
fgp_flags |= fgf_set_order(len);
if (iocb && iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_DONTCACHE)
fgp_flags |= FGP_DONTCACHE;
return __filemap_get_folio(mapping, index, fgp_flags,
mapping_gfp_mask(mapping));
}
The Ceph write_begin path calls netfs_write_begin() but does not pass
IOCB_DONTCACHE through to trigger __folio_set_dropbehind. So,
folio_test_dropbehind() would never be true on the Ceph write path right now.
Does it make sense?
> At the moment, buffered RWF_DONTCACHE writes still go through the
> usual Ceph writeback path, which mirrors the written data into
> fscache. The data is dropped from the page cache, but we still spend
> local I/O and local cache space to retain a copy in fscache.
>
> The DONTCACHE documentation is only about the page cache and the
> intent is to avoid caching data that will not be needed again soon.
> I believe skipping fscache writes during Ceph writeback on such pages
> would follow the same spirit: commit the write to permanent storage,
> but otherwise get it out of the way quickly.
>
> Use folio_test_dropbehind() to treat such folios as non-cacheable for
> the purposes of Ceph's write-side fscache population. This skips both
> ceph_set_page_fscache() and the corresponding write-to-cache operation
> for dropbehind folios.
>
> The writepages path can batch together folios with different cacheability,
> so track cacheable subranges separately and only submit fscache writes
> for contiguous non-dropbehind spans.
>
> This keeps normal buffered writeback unchanged, while making
> RWF_DONTCACHE a better match for its intended "don't retain this
> locally" behavior and avoiding unnecessary local cache traffic.
>
> Signed-off-by: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@ionos.com>
> ---
> Note: this is an additional feature on top of my Ceph-DONTCACHE patch,
> see https://lore.kernel.org/ceph-devel/20260401053109.1861724-1-max.kellermann@ionos.com/
> ---
> fs/ceph/addr.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ceph/addr.c b/fs/ceph/addr.c
> index 2090fc78529c..9612a1d8ccb2 100644
> --- a/fs/ceph/addr.c
> +++ b/fs/ceph/addr.c
> @@ -576,6 +576,21 @@ static inline void ceph_fscache_write_to_cache(struct inode *inode, u64 off, u64
> }
> #endif /* CONFIG_CEPH_FSCACHE */
>
> +static inline bool ceph_folio_is_cacheable(const struct folio *folio, bool caching)
> +{
> + /* Dropbehind writeback should not populate the local fscache. */
> + return caching && !folio_test_dropbehind(folio);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void ceph_flush_fscache_write(struct inode *inode, u64 off, u64 *len)
> +{
> + if (!*len)
> + return;
> +
> + ceph_fscache_write_to_cache(inode, off, *len, true);
Are you sure that caching should be always true? All other calls checks that
ceph_is_cache_enabled():
bool caching = ceph_is_cache_enabled(inode);
> + *len = 0;
> +}
The ceph_folio_is_cacheable() and ceph_flush_fscache_write() are out of
CONFIG_CEPH_FSCACHE. It doesn't look right.
> +
> struct ceph_writeback_ctl
> {
> loff_t i_size;
> @@ -730,7 +745,7 @@ static int write_folio_nounlock(struct folio *folio,
> struct ceph_writeback_ctl ceph_wbc;
> struct ceph_osd_client *osdc = &fsc->client->osdc;
> struct ceph_osd_request *req;
> - bool caching = ceph_is_cache_enabled(inode);
> + bool caching = ceph_folio_is_cacheable(folio, ceph_is_cache_enabled(inode));
> struct page *bounce_page = NULL;
>
> doutc(cl, "%llx.%llx folio %p idx %lu\n", ceph_vinop(inode), folio,
> @@ -1412,11 +1427,14 @@ int ceph_submit_write(struct address_space *mapping,
> bool caching = ceph_is_cache_enabled(inode);
> u64 offset;
> u64 len;
> + u64 cache_offset, cache_len;
Why do you need to introduce the cache_offset and cache_len? We already have
offset and len.
> unsigned i;
>
> new_request:
> offset = ceph_fscrypt_page_offset(ceph_wbc->pages[0]);
> len = ceph_wbc->wsize;
> + cache_offset = 0;
Is it correct initialization? Frankly speaking, I don't quite follow why we need
such initialization.
Thanks,
Slava.
> + cache_len = 0;
>
> req = ceph_osdc_new_request(&fsc->client->osdc,
> &ci->i_layout, vino,
> @@ -1477,9 +1495,11 @@ int ceph_submit_write(struct address_space *mapping,
> ceph_wbc->op_idx = 0;
> for (i = 0; i < ceph_wbc->locked_pages; i++) {
> u64 cur_offset;
> + bool cache_page;
>
> page = ceph_fscrypt_pagecache_page(ceph_wbc->pages[i]);
> cur_offset = page_offset(page);
> + cache_page = ceph_folio_is_cacheable(page_folio(page), caching);
>
> /*
> * Discontinuity in page range? Ceph can handle that by just passing
> @@ -1491,7 +1511,7 @@ int ceph_submit_write(struct address_space *mapping,
> break;
>
> /* Kick off an fscache write with what we have so far. */
> - ceph_fscache_write_to_cache(inode, offset, len, caching);
> + ceph_flush_fscache_write(inode, cache_offset, &cache_len);
>
> /* Start a new extent */
> osd_req_op_extent_dup_last(req, ceph_wbc->op_idx,
> @@ -1514,13 +1534,19 @@ int ceph_submit_write(struct address_space *mapping,
>
> set_page_writeback(page);
>
> - if (caching)
> + if (cache_page) {
> + if (!cache_len)
> + cache_offset = cur_offset;
> ceph_set_page_fscache(page);
> + cache_len += thp_size(page);
> + } else {
> + ceph_flush_fscache_write(inode, cache_offset, &cache_len);
> + }
>
> len += thp_size(page);
> }
>
> - ceph_fscache_write_to_cache(inode, offset, len, caching);
> + ceph_flush_fscache_write(inode, cache_offset, &cache_len);
>
> if (ceph_wbc->size_stable) {
> len = min(len, ceph_wbc->i_size - offset);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-02 19:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-01 20:56 [PATCH] ceph: do not fill fscache for RWF_DONTCACHE writeback Max Kellermann
2026-04-02 19:44 ` Viacheslav Dubeyko [this message]
2026-04-03 6:52 ` Max Kellermann
2026-04-03 17:18 ` Viacheslav Dubeyko
2026-04-03 18:13 ` Max Kellermann
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=dc807d60a59d18dca7a14256285b1cfdeb13d907.camel@redhat.com \
--to=vdubeyko@redhat.com \
--cc=amarkuze@redhat.com \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=idryomov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=max.kellermann@ionos.com \
--cc=netfs@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=pc@manguebit.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