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 C2E38C433EF for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 18:14:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230184AbiGASOq (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2022 14:14:46 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43976 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229508AbiGASOp (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2022 14:14:45 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x52c.google.com (mail-pg1-x52c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8DFD13FB4 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:14:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x52c.google.com with SMTP id 68so3075715pgb.10 for ; Fri, 01 Jul 2022 11:14:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+2cjOm2iV0K6Fh37ckIuAiSPC7PAkAib0BkzJQTS0+s=; b=37Z/LMNRq6UGadaXxmJOSRipY4rroGzOo3QgmZRy2ucWwXpMiTrzuNd7EEp6pNoJax HTUCYoauubMAVWuf0R7SarFV5P4ZeO6qr8rm6ZPPt7kXiv0Hc4gW6JPonc6R2CUXKDW3 hia5chKFOpdKMVjQ4lt/qFB8M+n0QeL5Fd2+/U+gLUZS5HKYBcVwkdM+A9swXyCWtD8P WQYLl3mtwqddkRd2iTE5dmwr07p3swYcSVXbbnRgv8fhtwiVdJYUgQRJ5zfW1uHMtr7D hgtuffkm4EVCOvEV1wUjpqBpUZxmxHoFjlagIe2taAsHlfCPaj6Z/Yr6V24EwTXdr2e1 phPw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=+2cjOm2iV0K6Fh37ckIuAiSPC7PAkAib0BkzJQTS0+s=; b=WKXuoZBr+lBmBTTG23TX/uQpaYpj0l1uf0xNzuwFvMfZlRx0mmtiYkvO0mDLwxAW3A 5Old0WDCMxXT8S9HCJEHaRPf/r5YgBWEG3S3pCSeIz0wYwk7/A8rmDY0K3T2NeaVswuu 8GctAKQUWanLPEVhkAW8O4wKn11VuM3YIpE2Xcw43hzvjdcBlfApOgArQsKiFPnsWW8t d2xrB46+1I3VKALNj2rTqsBZ7CGMzOj0WI3pCEiqCA4/Lmmy02J5I/hWCa+HNFQdkeKP Y4/nFA7P7l2uDHV0i32s9ZoJoXXATLyJEsgRxMCwum35rArDimw7bq1CUQaX43tdun/B ne4Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora/QR1bmVv/zYtXLYaYIcqxk7GpsV5yhH7fy9lwbOh0S0cbED0Uo ECQgAymmC8yc1E/SqNJxnS2r9g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1tgpHo+10wcI7TOf9FXHzT5lkC3dyL+mkSzScOZoo+gMDXmGOW87BcbBjT7laY527aiFmqxcQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:26cf:b0:4f6:fc52:7b6a with SMTP id p15-20020a056a0026cf00b004f6fc527b6amr21371577pfw.39.1656699283240; Fri, 01 Jul 2022 11:14:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([198.8.77.157]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h5-20020a170902680500b0015e8d4eb20dsm16065865plk.87.2022.07.01.11.14.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 01 Jul 2022 11:14:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <47dd9e6a-4e08-e562-12ff-5450fc42da77@kernel.dk> Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2022 12:14:41 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 15/15] xfs: Add async buffered write support Content-Language: en-US To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Al Viro , Stefan Roesch , io-uring@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, david@fromorbit.com, jack@suse.cz, hch@infradead.org, Christoph Hellwig References: <20220601210141.3773402-1-shr@fb.com> <20220601210141.3773402-16-shr@fb.com> <0a75a0c4-e2e5-b403-27bc-e43872fecdc1@kernel.dk> From: Jens Axboe In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On 7/1/22 12:05 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Fri, Jul 01, 2022 at 08:38:07AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 7/1/22 8:30 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> On 7/1/22 8:19 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>> On 6/30/22 10:39 PM, Al Viro wrote: >>>>> On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 02:01:41PM -0700, Stefan Roesch wrote: >>>>>> This adds the async buffered write support to XFS. For async buffered >>>>>> write requests, the request will return -EAGAIN if the ilock cannot be >>>>>> obtained immediately. >>>>> >>>>> breaks generic/471... >>>> >>>> That test case is odd, because it makes some weird assumptions about >>>> what RWF_NOWAIT means. Most notably that it makes it mean if we should >>>> instantiate blocks or not. Where did those assumed semantics come from? >>>> On the read side, we have clearly documented that it should "not wait >>>> for data which is not immediately available". >>>> >>>> Now it is possible that we're returning a spurious -EAGAIN here when we >>>> should not be. And that would be a bug imho. I'll dig in and see what's >>>> going on. >>> >>> This is the timestamp update that needs doing which will now return >>> -EAGAIN if IOCB_NOWAIT is set as it may block. >>> >>> I do wonder if we should just allow inode time updates with IOCB_NOWAIT, >>> even on the io_uring side. Either that, or passed in RWF_NOWAIT >>> semantics don't map completely to internal IOCB_NOWAIT semantics. At >>> least in terms of what generic/471 is doing, but I'm not sure who came >>> up with that and if it's established semantics or just some made up ones >>> from whomever wrote that test. I don't think they make any sense, to be >>> honest. >> >> Further support that generic/471 is just randomly made up semantics, >> it needs to special case btrfs with nocow or you'd get -EAGAIN anyway >> for that test. >> >> And it's relying on some random timing to see if this works. I really >> think that test case is just hot garbage, and doesn't test anything >> meaningful. > > I had thought that NOWAIT means "don't wait for *any*thing", > which would include timestamp updates... but then I've never been all > that clear on what specifically NOWAIT will and won't wait for. :/ Agree, at least the read semantics (kind of) make sense, but the ones seemingly made up by generic/471 don't seem to make any sense at all. -- Jens Axboe