From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19D7AC433F5 for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 16:27:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239441AbhLAQao (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2021 11:30:44 -0500 Received: from sender2-pp-o92.zoho.com.cn ([163.53.93.251]:25359 "EHLO sender2-pp-o92.zoho.com.cn" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239044AbhLAQan (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2021 11:30:43 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1638375842; cv=none; d=zoho.com.cn; s=zohoarc; b=bsu7LQ2PoeLY0foZtF4JFW0yFeQvxbFUluNQXk3az6/4qMWdVyL7zq5fqzSRty2/3rjbqKl/iZNyBCNhJr7X9O+jJuzOC/W/dSR0YSjTiM5xf681ScJA/gx3VYEGp6HvKXDqAYnTOw15b+S5bHVBrb2P4S4QL9CJyz7oYI2imTY= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zoho.com.cn; s=zohoarc; t=1638375842; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Reply-To:References:Subject:To; bh=rcScbATqE6loxaDgQyPaD/4ZwjFVIqn67jJGI+uVyDw=; b=kLVzGKVujfAPYvMR/1Aln8qXgt7I7DeIGLwEeDNcRIPuHOAKPPegdQDEvwjo/FdUnFxer/7EmAywcz/7eTABMuoNaA0a/hQln6vpLGIspCdm7ghgiS6Bh0wsBBANrAJKrzMCQ79xVb6bNNc5lZIFlRSB+jK9trn2YjiXaWuBSzQ= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zoho.com.cn; dkim=pass header.i=mykernel.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cgxu519@mykernel.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1638375842; s=zohomail; d=mykernel.net; i=cgxu519@mykernel.net; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=rcScbATqE6loxaDgQyPaD/4ZwjFVIqn67jJGI+uVyDw=; b=dpjnOQbInxwEwa4T0nZRewxMfGWJLRZ28x+r7O48ol1Cf0DHFYU4LOvHSWV0fljR pX1G/6KwExjNjQeBgIUmeJgEz68+nayqn5npFifiTYswd6bxaezzNc+QUZ9xY4Lzida SUg7W/+5nn/FSPbsys3d/+Al3GXaDOU1HSR9Fx3M= Received: from mail.baihui.com by mx.zoho.com.cn with SMTP id 1638375840259479.9473699389241; Thu, 2 Dec 2021 00:24:00 +0800 (CST) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2021 00:24:00 +0800 From: Chengguang Xu Reply-To: cgxu519@mykernel.net To: "Jan Kara" , "Amir Goldstein" , "Miklos Szeredi" Cc: "linux-fsdevel" , "overlayfs" , "linux-kernel" , "ronyjin" , "charliecgxu" , "Vivek Goyal" Message-ID: <17d76cf59ee.12f4517f122167.2687299278423224602@mykernel.net> In-Reply-To: <20211201134610.GA1815@quack2.suse.cz> References: <20211118112315.GD13047@quack2.suse.cz> <17d32ecf46e.124314f8f672.8832559275193368959@mykernel.net> <20211118164349.GB8267@quack2.suse.cz> <17d36d37022.1227b6f102736.1047689367927335302@mykernel.net> <20211130112206.GE7174@quack2.suse.cz> <17d719b79f9.d89bf95117881.5882353172682156775@mykernel.net> <17d73da701b.e571c37220081.6904057835107693340@mykernel.net> <17d74b08dcd.c0e94e6320632.9167792887632811518@mykernel.net> <20211201134610.GA1815@quack2.suse.cz> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 06/10] ovl: implement overlayfs' ->write_inode operation MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Importance: Medium User-Agent: ZohoCN Mail X-Mailer: ZohoCN Mail Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org ---- =E5=9C=A8 =E6=98=9F=E6=9C=9F=E4=B8=89, 2021-12-01 21:46:10 Jan Kara <= jack@suse.cz> =E6=92=B0=E5=86=99 ---- > On Wed 01-12-21 09:19:17, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 8:31 AM Chengguang Xu wr= ote: > > > So the final solution to handle all the concerns looks like accurate= ly > > > 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? > > > > >=20 > > Maybe you can still pull off a simpler version by remarking dirty only > > writably mmapped upper AND inode_is_open_for_write(upper)? >=20 > Well, if inode is writeably mapped, it must be also open for write, does= n't > it? The VMA of the mapping will hold file open. So remarking overlay ino= de > 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? >=20 > > If I am not mistaken, if you always mark overlay inode dirty on ovl_fl= ush() > > 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 shou= ld > > be enough. No? >=20 > 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... >=20 To be honest I even don't fully understand what's the ->flush() logic in ov= erlayfs. Why should we open new underlying file when calling ->flush()? Is it still correct in the case of opening lower layer first then copy-uped= case?=20 Thanks, Chengguang =20