From: Chengguang Xu <cgxu519@mykernel.net>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ronyjin <ronyjin@tencent.com>,
charliecgxu <charliecgxu@tencent.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 06/10] ovl: implement overlayfs' ->write_inode operation
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2022 00:09:39 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <362c02fa-2625-30c4-17a1-1a95753b6065@mykernel.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxgwZoB5GQJZvpPLzRqrQA-+JSowD+brUwMSYWf9zZjiRQ@mail.gmail.com>
在 2021/12/7 13:33, Amir Goldstein 写道:
> On Sun, Dec 5, 2021 at 4:07 PM Chengguang Xu <cgxu519@mykernel.net> wrote:
>> ---- 在 星期四, 2021-12-02 06:47:25 Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> 撰写 ----
>> > On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 6:24 PM Chengguang Xu <cgxu519@mykernel.net> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > ---- 在 星期三, 2021-12-01 21:46:10 Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> 撰写 ----
>> > > > On Wed 01-12-21 09:19:17, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>> > > > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 8:31 AM Chengguang Xu <cgxu519@mykernel.net> wrote:
>> > > > > > So the final solution to handle all the concerns looks like accurately
>> > > > > > mark overlay inode diry on modification and re-mark dirty only for
>> > > > > > mmaped file in ->write_inode().
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi Miklos, Jan
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Will you agree with new proposal above?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Maybe you can still pull off a simpler version by remarking dirty only
>> > > > > writably mmapped upper AND inode_is_open_for_write(upper)?
>> > > >
>> > > > Well, if inode is writeably mapped, it must be also open for write, doesn't
>> > > > it? The VMA of the mapping will hold file open. So remarking overlay inode
>> > > > dirty during writeback while inode_is_open_for_write(upper) looks like
>> > > > reasonably easy and presumably there won't be that many inodes open for
>> > > > writing for this to become big overhead?
>> >
>> > I think it should be ok and a good tradeoff of complexity vs. performance.
>>
>> IMO, mark dirtiness on write is relatively simple, so I think we can mark the
>> overlayfs inode dirty during real write behavior and only remark writable mmap
>> unconditionally in ->write_inode().
>>
> If by "on write" you mean on write/copy_file_range/splice_write/...
> then yes I agree
> since we have to cover all other mnt_want_write() cases anyway.
>
>> >
>> > > >
>> > > > > If I am not mistaken, if you always mark overlay inode dirty on ovl_flush()
>> > > > > of FMODE_WRITE file, there is nothing that can make upper inode dirty
>> > > > > after last close (if upper is not mmaped), so one more inode sync should
>> > > > > be enough. No?
>> > > >
>> > > > But we still need to catch other dirtying events like timestamp updates,
>> > > > truncate(2) etc. to mark overlay inode dirty. Not sure how reliably that
>> > > > can be done...
>> > > >
>> >
>> > Oh yeh, we have those as well :)
>> > All those cases should be covered by ovl_copyattr() that updates the
>> > ovl inode ctime/mtime, so always dirty in ovl_copyattr() should be good.
>>
>> Currently ovl_copyattr() does not cover all the cases, so I think we still need to carefully
>> check all the places of calling mnt_want_write().
>>
> Careful audit is always good, but if we do not have ovl_copyattr() in
> a call site
> that should mark inode dirty, then it sounds like a bug, because ovl inode ctime
> will not get updated. Do you know of any such cases?
Sorry for my late response, I've been very busy lately.
For your question, for example, there is a case of calling
ovl_want_write() in ovl_cache_get_impure() and caller does not call
ovl_copyattr()
so I think we should explicitly mark ovl inode dirty in that case. Is
that probably a bug?
Thanks,
Chengguang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-05 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-23 13:08 [RFC PATCH v5 00/10] implement containerized syncfs for overlayfs Chengguang Xu
2021-09-23 13:08 ` [RFC PATCH v5 01/10] ovl: setup overlayfs' private bdi Chengguang Xu
2021-09-23 13:08 ` [RFC PATCH v5 02/10] ovl: implement ->writepages operation Chengguang Xu
2021-09-23 13:08 ` [RFC PATCH v5 03/10] ovl: implement overlayfs' ->evict_inode operation Chengguang Xu
2021-10-06 15:33 ` Miklos Szeredi
2021-10-07 6:08 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-10-07 7:43 ` Miklos Szeredi
2021-09-23 13:08 ` [RFC PATCH v5 04/10] ovl: mark overlayfs' inode dirty on modification Chengguang Xu
2021-10-07 18:43 ` Miklos Szeredi
2021-09-23 13:08 ` [RFC PATCH v5 05/10] ovl: mark overlayfs' inode dirty on shared mmap Chengguang Xu
2021-09-23 13:08 ` [RFC PATCH v5 06/10] ovl: implement overlayfs' ->write_inode operation Chengguang Xu
2021-10-07 9:01 ` Jan Kara
2021-10-07 12:26 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-10-07 14:41 ` Jan Kara
2021-10-07 14:54 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-10-07 9:23 ` Miklos Szeredi
2021-10-07 12:28 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-10-07 12:45 ` Miklos Szeredi
2021-10-07 13:09 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-10-07 13:34 ` Miklos Szeredi
2021-10-07 14:46 ` Jan Kara
2021-10-07 14:53 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-10-07 18:51 ` Miklos Szeredi
2021-10-08 13:13 ` Jan Kara
2021-11-16 2:20 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-11-16 12:35 ` Miklos Szeredi
2021-11-17 6:11 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-11-18 6:32 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-11-18 11:23 ` Jan Kara
2021-11-18 12:02 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-11-18 16:43 ` Jan Kara
2021-11-19 6:12 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-11-30 11:22 ` Jan Kara
2021-11-30 16:09 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-11-30 19:04 ` Amir Goldstein
2021-12-01 2:37 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-12-01 6:31 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-12-01 7:19 ` Amir Goldstein
2021-12-01 13:46 ` Jan Kara
2021-12-01 14:59 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-12-01 16:24 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-12-01 22:47 ` Amir Goldstein
2021-12-01 23:23 ` ovl_flush() behavior Amir Goldstein
2021-12-02 2:11 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-12-02 15:20 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-12-02 15:59 ` Amir Goldstein
2021-12-02 22:00 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-12-02 15:14 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-12-05 14:06 ` [RFC PATCH v5 06/10] ovl: implement overlayfs' ->write_inode operation Chengguang Xu
2021-12-07 5:33 ` Amir Goldstein
2022-02-05 16:09 ` Chengguang Xu [this message]
2022-02-05 16:23 ` Amir Goldstein
2021-09-23 13:08 ` [RFC PATCH v5 07/10] ovl: cache dirty overlayfs' inode Chengguang Xu
2021-10-07 11:09 ` Miklos Szeredi
2021-10-07 12:04 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-10-07 12:27 ` Miklos Szeredi
2021-09-23 13:08 ` [RFC PATCH v5 08/10] fs: export wait_sb_inodes() Chengguang Xu
2021-09-23 13:08 ` [RFC PATCH v5 09/10] fs: introduce new helper sync_fs_and_blockdev() Chengguang Xu
2021-10-19 7:15 ` Amir Goldstein
2021-11-15 11:39 ` Chengguang Xu
2021-09-23 13:08 ` [RFC PATCH v5 10/10] ovl: implement containerized syncfs for overlayfs Chengguang Xu
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=362c02fa-2625-30c4-17a1-1a95753b6065@mykernel.net \
--to=cgxu519@mykernel.net \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=charliecgxu@tencent.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=ronyjin@tencent.com \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
/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).