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 EBE06C433F5 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 21:00:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1377713AbiATVAd (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Jan 2022 16:00:33 -0500 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org ([145.40.68.75]:48280 "EHLO ams.source.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1347149AbiATVAa (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Jan 2022 16:00:30 -0500 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 400DAB81E5B; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 21:00:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E0F31C340E0; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 21:00:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1642712428; bh=Sgn6vsiQaVTZl6FA2Bi6v2vMumeBHvXQ8WnUp3/OgOQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Rg3DWs5KzBBcatjdrT34CEMOazOi9A8JaCoVRLZDvRuX6uUX4LDihsBfpqnhGACwl mQLMV34CpRp6JgYQYU7oc8ZvkXFlU98cUhrfsyxCO3aBZplrE4JLcxYjp4X2zouMD3 a4iHIGG0S+HYkf4bJxKU/LwG2k9Z+r4GRYbpZQnHts0hmDLKtEj7dn5Yg6JQC8jYSF 9s6uhJa5exrDusE53neADlAA1qMvq2PTuiBnYrkBDgrSRiIVaSuRDqHpqPSSvAv6YT rzHDLupGZd3WwwUNnWYYQ7TfYZaszzj3iKB6iAztLjBX6WklwqP0O0mc7x2TYX1AMS gnCMv9pVePpTQ== Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 13:00:27 -0800 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Eric Biggers Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Dave Chinner , Theodore Ts'o , Jaegeuk Kim , Chao Yu Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/5] add support for direct I/O with fscrypt using blk-crypto Message-ID: <20220120210027.GQ13540@magnolia> References: <20220120071215.123274-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> <20220120171027.GL13540@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 12:39:14PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 09:10:27AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 12:30:23AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 11:12:10PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > > > > > > > > Given the above, as far as I know the only remaining objection to this > > > > patchset would be that DIO constraints aren't sufficiently discoverable > > > > by userspace. Now, to put this in context, this is a longstanding issue > > > > with all Linux filesystems, except XFS which has XFS_IOC_DIOINFO. It's > > > > not specific to this feature, and it doesn't actually seem to be too > > > > important in practice; many other filesystem features place constraints > > > > on DIO, and f2fs even *only* allows fully FS block size aligned DIO. > > > > (And for better or worse, many systems using fscrypt already have > > > > out-of-tree patches that enable DIO support, and people don't seem to > > > > have trouble with the FS block size alignment requirement.) > > > > > > It might make sense to use this as an opportunity to implement > > > XFS_IOC_DIOINFO for ext4 and f2fs. > > > > Hmm. A potential problem with DIOINFO is that it doesn't explicitly > > list the /file/ position alignment requirement: > > > > struct dioattr { > > __u32 d_mem; /* data buffer memory alignment */ > > __u32 d_miniosz; /* min xfer size */ > > __u32 d_maxiosz; /* max xfer size */ > > }; > > Well, the comment above struct dioattr says: > > /* > * Direct I/O attribute record used with XFS_IOC_DIOINFO > * d_miniosz is the min xfer size, xfer size multiple and file seek offset > * alignment. > */ > > So d_miniosz serves that purpose already. > > > > > Since I /think/ fscrypt requires that directio writes be aligned to file > > block size, right? > > The file position must be a multiple of the filesystem block size, yes. > Likewise for the "minimum xfer size" and "xfer size multiple", and the "data > buffer memory alignment" for that matter. So I think XFS_IOC_DIOINFO would be > good enough for the fscrypt direct I/O case. Oh, ok then. In that case, just hoist XFS_IOC_DIOINFO to the VFS and add a couple of implementations for ext4 and f2fs, and I think that'll be enough to get the fscrypt patchset moving again. > The real question is whether there are any direct I/O implementations where > XFS_IOC_DIOINFO would *not* be good enough, for example due to "xfer size > multiple" != "file seek offset alignment" being allowed. In that case we would > need to define a new ioctl that is more general (like the one you described > below) rather than simply uplifting XFS_IOC_DIOINFO. I don't think there are any currently, but if anyone ever redesigns DIOINFO we might as well make all those pieces explicit. > More general is nice, but it's not helpful if no one will actually use the extra > information. So we need to figure out what is actually useful. Clearly I haven't wanted d_opt_fpos badly enough to propose revving the ioctl. ;) --D > > > How about something like this: > > > > struct dioattr2 { > > __u32 d_mem; /* data buffer memory alignment */ > > __u32 d_miniosz; /* min xfer size */ > > __u32 d_maxiosz; /* max xfer size */ > > > > /* file range must be aligned to this value */ > > __u32 d_min_fpos; > > > > /* for optimal performance, align file range to this */ > > __u32 d_opt_fpos; > > > > __u32 d_padding[11]; > > }; > > > > - Eric 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 lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7F5DC433F5 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 21:00:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1nAeXw-0006T6-FL; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 21:00:39 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1nAeXv-0006Sz-7a for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 21:00:38 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=ewLJMskgDDEUEezxNTdCaVuJ9OMAq9BkCWpgJLO79rE=; b=b9INV/DN6d7qbooX2zU4vSWPwt RLubkIAH9Vy/a89LdPvrf2qYTLsG6uYp6ZnStv2c7CoiDZSXbUpKWPxALbI2+5VwHnWbHIXi2CI3T JY3mzZ1JKsw1V8j63jW06P4vGsWjSFDmZKSGF/CDkLGSpD68NZH1RJCUw4BRknaRXJvI=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To :From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=ewLJMskgDDEUEezxNTdCaVuJ9OMAq9BkCWpgJLO79rE=; b=XR+RSVTET7SUDqBsWfBIrX0BS6 MObTl9WGslV6u8vG30D5XEXDRAAKXUPD2U8/FPD35LDCtddXgUJGRnOD8QT67RCSTZNSSzPzmyKKf lXjflomqWkBZ8J+o2im7BAVINMyXeIFbIgFpWo1Zi0ahhMOdG27cOMrCJCikqKE9anls=; Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org ([139.178.84.217]) by sfi-mx-1.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.3) id 1nAeXp-005PX9-Sk for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 21:00:37 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87C1B61874; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 21:00:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E0F31C340E0; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 21:00:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1642712428; bh=Sgn6vsiQaVTZl6FA2Bi6v2vMumeBHvXQ8WnUp3/OgOQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Rg3DWs5KzBBcatjdrT34CEMOazOi9A8JaCoVRLZDvRuX6uUX4LDihsBfpqnhGACwl mQLMV34CpRp6JgYQYU7oc8ZvkXFlU98cUhrfsyxCO3aBZplrE4JLcxYjp4X2zouMD3 a4iHIGG0S+HYkf4bJxKU/LwG2k9Z+r4GRYbpZQnHts0hmDLKtEj7dn5Yg6JQC8jYSF 9s6uhJa5exrDusE53neADlAA1qMvq2PTuiBnYrkBDgrSRiIVaSuRDqHpqPSSvAv6YT rzHDLupGZd3WwwUNnWYYQ7TfYZaszzj3iKB6iAztLjBX6WklwqP0O0mc7x2TYX1AMS gnCMv9pVePpTQ== Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 13:00:27 -0800 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Eric Biggers Message-ID: <20220120210027.GQ13540@magnolia> References: <20220120071215.123274-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> <20220120171027.GL13540@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Headers-End: 1nAeXp-005PX9-Sk Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v10 0/5] add support for direct I/O with fscrypt using blk-crypto X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Theodore Ts'o , Dave Chinner , linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Christoph Hellwig , linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Jaegeuk Kim , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 12:39:14PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 09:10:27AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 12:30:23AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 11:12:10PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > > > > > > > > Given the above, as far as I know the only remaining objection to this > > > > patchset would be that DIO constraints aren't sufficiently discoverable > > > > by userspace. Now, to put this in context, this is a longstanding issue > > > > with all Linux filesystems, except XFS which has XFS_IOC_DIOINFO. It's > > > > not specific to this feature, and it doesn't actually seem to be too > > > > important in practice; many other filesystem features place constraints > > > > on DIO, and f2fs even *only* allows fully FS block size aligned DIO. > > > > (And for better or worse, many systems using fscrypt already have > > > > out-of-tree patches that enable DIO support, and people don't seem to > > > > have trouble with the FS block size alignment requirement.) > > > > > > It might make sense to use this as an opportunity to implement > > > XFS_IOC_DIOINFO for ext4 and f2fs. > > > > Hmm. A potential problem with DIOINFO is that it doesn't explicitly > > list the /file/ position alignment requirement: > > > > struct dioattr { > > __u32 d_mem; /* data buffer memory alignment */ > > __u32 d_miniosz; /* min xfer size */ > > __u32 d_maxiosz; /* max xfer size */ > > }; > > Well, the comment above struct dioattr says: > > /* > * Direct I/O attribute record used with XFS_IOC_DIOINFO > * d_miniosz is the min xfer size, xfer size multiple and file seek offset > * alignment. > */ > > So d_miniosz serves that purpose already. > > > > > Since I /think/ fscrypt requires that directio writes be aligned to file > > block size, right? > > The file position must be a multiple of the filesystem block size, yes. > Likewise for the "minimum xfer size" and "xfer size multiple", and the "data > buffer memory alignment" for that matter. So I think XFS_IOC_DIOINFO would be > good enough for the fscrypt direct I/O case. Oh, ok then. In that case, just hoist XFS_IOC_DIOINFO to the VFS and add a couple of implementations for ext4 and f2fs, and I think that'll be enough to get the fscrypt patchset moving again. > The real question is whether there are any direct I/O implementations where > XFS_IOC_DIOINFO would *not* be good enough, for example due to "xfer size > multiple" != "file seek offset alignment" being allowed. In that case we would > need to define a new ioctl that is more general (like the one you described > below) rather than simply uplifting XFS_IOC_DIOINFO. I don't think there are any currently, but if anyone ever redesigns DIOINFO we might as well make all those pieces explicit. > More general is nice, but it's not helpful if no one will actually use the extra > information. So we need to figure out what is actually useful. Clearly I haven't wanted d_opt_fpos badly enough to propose revving the ioctl. ;) --D > > > How about something like this: > > > > struct dioattr2 { > > __u32 d_mem; /* data buffer memory alignment */ > > __u32 d_miniosz; /* min xfer size */ > > __u32 d_maxiosz; /* max xfer size */ > > > > /* file range must be aligned to this value */ > > __u32 d_min_fpos; > > > > /* for optimal performance, align file range to this */ > > __u32 d_opt_fpos; > > > > __u32 d_padding[11]; > > }; > > > > - Eric _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel