All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu,
	adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, jack@suse.cz, ritesh.list@gmail.com,
	hch@infradead.org, djwong@kernel.org, willy@infradead.org,
	zokeefe@google.com, yi.zhang@huawei.com, chengzhihao1@huawei.com,
	yukuai3@huawei.com, wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 24/34] ext4: implement buffered write iomap path
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 13:10:53 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <998cae29-61c3-bb10-b05b-853edfd176b0@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZjllkHuyOedA/Tzg@dread.disaster.area>

On 2024/5/7 7:19, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 07:44:44PM +0800, Zhang Yi wrote:
>> On 2024/5/1 16:33, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 06:11:13PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 10:29:38PM +0800, Zhang Yi wrote:
>>>>> From: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huawei.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Implement buffered write iomap path, use ext4_da_map_blocks() to map
>>>>> delalloc extents and add ext4_iomap_get_blocks() to allocate blocks if
>>>>> delalloc is disabled or free space is about to run out.
>>>>>
>>>>> Note that we always allocate unwritten extents for new blocks in the
>>>>> iomap write path, this means that the allocation type is no longer
>>>>> controlled by the dioread_nolock mount option. After that, we could
>>>>> postpone the i_disksize updating to the writeback path, and drop journal
>>>>> handle in the buffered dealloc write path completely.
>>> .....
>>>>> +/*
>>>>> + * Drop the staled delayed allocation range from the write failure,
>>>>> + * including both start and end blocks. If not, we could leave a range
>>>>> + * of delayed extents covered by a clean folio, it could lead to
>>>>> + * inaccurate space reservation.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +static int ext4_iomap_punch_delalloc(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset,
>>>>> +				     loff_t length)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +	ext4_es_remove_extent(inode, offset >> inode->i_blkbits,
>>>>> +			DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(length, EXT4_BLOCK_SIZE(inode->i_sb)));
>>>>>  	return 0;
>>>>>  }
>>>>>  
>>>>> +static int ext4_iomap_buffered_write_end(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset,
>>>>> +					 loff_t length, ssize_t written,
>>>>> +					 unsigned int flags,
>>>>> +					 struct iomap *iomap)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +	handle_t *handle;
>>>>> +	loff_t end;
>>>>> +	int ret = 0, ret2;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	/* delalloc */
>>>>> +	if (iomap->flags & IOMAP_F_EXT4_DELALLOC) {
>>>>> +		ret = iomap_file_buffered_write_punch_delalloc(inode, iomap,
>>>>> +			offset, length, written, ext4_iomap_punch_delalloc);
>>>>> +		if (ret)
>>>>> +			ext4_warning(inode->i_sb,
>>>>> +			     "Failed to clean up delalloc for inode %lu, %d",
>>>>> +			     inode->i_ino, ret);
>>>>> +		return ret;
>>>>> +	}
>>>>
>>>> Why are you creating a delalloc extent for the write operation and
>>>> then immediately deleting it from the extent tree once the write
>>>> operation is done?
>>>
>>> Ignore this, I mixed up the ext4_iomap_punch_delalloc() code
>>> directly above with iomap_file_buffered_write_punch_delalloc().
>>>
>>> In hindsight, iomap_file_buffered_write_punch_delalloc() is poorly
>>> named, as it is handling a short write situation which requires
>>> newly allocated delalloc blocks to be punched.
>>> iomap_file_buffered_write_finish() would probably be a better name
>>> for it....
>>>
>>>> Also, why do you need IOMAP_F_EXT4_DELALLOC? Isn't a delalloc iomap
>>>> set up with iomap->type = IOMAP_DELALLOC? Why can't that be used?
>>>
>>> But this still stands - the first thing
>>> iomap_file_buffered_write_punch_delalloc() is:
>>>
>>> 	if (iomap->type != IOMAP_DELALLOC)
>>>                 return 0;
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for the suggestion, the delalloc and non-delalloc write paths
>> share the same ->iomap_end() now (i.e. ext4_iomap_buffered_write_end()),
>> I use the IOMAP_F_EXT4_DELALLOC to identify the write path.
> 
> Again, you don't need that. iomap tracks newly allocated
> IOMAP_DELALLOC extents via the IOMAP_F_NEW flag that should be
> getting set in the ->iomap_begin() call when it creates a new
> delalloc extent.
> 
> Please look at the second check in
> iomap_file_buffered_write_punch_delalloc():
> 
> 	if (iomap->type != IOMAP_DELALLOC)
>                 return 0;
> 
>         /* If we didn't reserve the blocks, we're not allowed to punch them. */
>         if (!(iomap->flags & IOMAP_F_NEW))
>                 return 0;
> 
>> For
>> non-delalloc path, If we have allocated more blocks and copied less, we
>> should truncate extra blocks that newly allocated by ->iomap_begin().
> 
> Why? If they were allocated as unwritten, then you can just leave
> them there as unwritten extents, same as XFS. Keep in mind that if
> we get a short write, it is extremely likely the application is
> going to rewrite the remaining data immediately, so if we allocated
> blocks they are likely to still be needed, anyway....
> 

Make sense, we don't need to free the extra blocks beyond EOF since they
are unwritten, we can drop this handle for non-delalloc path on ext4 now.

>> If we use IOMAP_DELALLOC, we can't tell if the blocks are
>> pre-existing or newly allocated, we can't truncate the
>> pre-existing blocks, so I have to introduce IOMAP_F_EXT4_DELALLOC.
>> But if we split the delalloc and non-delalloc handler, we could
>> drop IOMAP_F_EXT4_DELALLOC.
> 
> As per above: IOMAP_F_NEW tells us -exactly- this.
> 
> IOMAP_F_NEW should be set on any newly allocated block - delalloc or
> real - because that's the flag that tells the iomap infrastructure
> whether zero-around is needed for partial block writes. If ext4 is
> not setting this flag on delalloc regions allocated by
> ->iomap_begin(), then that's a serious bug.
> 
>> I also checked xfs, IIUC, xfs doesn't free the extra blocks beyond EOF
>> in xfs_buffered_write_iomap_end() for non-delalloc case since they will
>> be freed by xfs_free_eofblocks in some other inactive paths, like
>> xfs_release()/xfs_inactive()/..., is that right?
> 
> XFS doesn't care about real blocks beyond EOF existing -
> xfs_free_eofblocks() is an optimistic operation that does not
> guarantee that it will remove blocks beyond EOF. Similarly, we don't
> care about real blocks within EOF because we alway allocate data
> extents as unwritten, so we don't have any stale data exposure
> issues to worry about on short writes leaving allocated blocks
> behind.
> 
> OTOH, delalloc extents without dirty page cache pages over them
> cannot be allowed to exist. Without dirty pages, there is no trigger
> to convert those to real extents (i.e. nothing to write back). Hence
> the only sane thing that can be done with them on a write error or
> short write is remove them in the context where they were created.
> 
> This is the only reason that the
> iomap_file_buffered_write_punch_delalloc() exists - it abstracts
> this nasty corner case away from filesystems that support delalloc
> so they don't have to worry about getting this right. That's whole
> point of having delalloc aware infrastructure - individual
> filesysetms don't need to handle all these weird corner cases
> themselves because the infrastructure takes care of them...
> 

Yeah, thanks for the explanation. The iomap_file_buffered_write_punch_delalloc()
is very useful, it find pages that have dirty data still pending in the page
cache, punch out all the delalloc blocks beside those blocks. I realized that
it is used to fix a race condition between either writeback or mmap page
faults that xfs encountered [1].

We will meet the same problem for ext3 and ext2 which are not extent based.
Their new allocated blocks were written, we need to free them if we get a short
write, but we can't simply do it through ext2_write_failed() and
ext4_truncate_failed_write(), we still need to use
iomap_file_buffered_write_punch_delalloc().

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221123055812.747923-6-david@fromorbit.com/

Thanks,
Yi.


  reply	other threads:[~2024-05-07  5:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 67+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-04-10 14:29 [RESEND RFC PATCH v4 00/34] ext4: use iomap for regular file's buffered IO path and enable large folio Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [PATCH v4 01/34] ext4: factor out a common helper to query extent map Zhang Yi
2024-04-26 11:55   ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [PATCH v4 02/34] ext4: check the extent status again before inserting delalloc block Zhang Yi
2024-04-26 12:31   ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-04-26 12:57     ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-04-26 13:19       ` Zhang Yi
2024-04-26 16:39         ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-04-28  3:00           ` Zhang Yi
2024-04-29 14:59             ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-05-07  3:15               ` Zhang Yi
2024-05-01  7:47           ` Dave Chinner
2024-05-01  6:51   ` Dave Chinner
2024-05-01 12:19     ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-05-01 22:49       ` Dave Chinner
2024-05-02  4:11         ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-05-06  3:49           ` Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [PATCH v4 03/34] ext4: trim delalloc extent Zhang Yi
2024-05-01 14:31   ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-05-06  6:15     ` Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [PATCH v4 04/34] ext4: drop iblock parameter Zhang Yi
2024-05-01 14:41   ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [PATCH v4 05/34] ext4: make ext4_es_insert_delayed_block() insert multi-blocks Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [PATCH v4 06/34] ext4: make ext4_da_reserve_space() reserve multi-clusters Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [PATCH v4 07/34] ext4: factor out check for whether a cluster is allocated Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [PATCH v4 08/34] ext4: make ext4_insert_delayed_block() insert multi-blocks Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [PATCH v4 09/34] ext4: make ext4_da_map_blocks() buffer_head unaware Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 10/34] ext4: factor out ext4_map_create_blocks() to allocate new blocks Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 11/34] ext4: optimize the EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_DELALLOC_RESERVE flag set Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 12/34] ext4: don't set EXTENT_STATUS_DELAYED on allocated blocks Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 13/34] ext4: let __revise_pending() return newly inserted pendings Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 14/34] ext4: count removed reserved blocks for delalloc only extent entry Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 15/34] ext4: update delalloc data reserve spcae in ext4_es_insert_extent() Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 16/34] ext4: drop ext4_es_delayed_clu() Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 17/34] ext4: use ext4_map_query_blocks() in ext4_map_blocks() Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 18/34] ext4: drop ext4_es_is_delonly() Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 19/34] ext4: drop all delonly descriptions Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 20/34] ext4: use reserved metadata blocks when splitting extent on endio Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 21/34] ext4: introduce seq counter for the extent status entry Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 22/34] ext4: add a new iomap aops for regular file's buffered IO path Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 23/34] ext4: implement buffered read iomap path Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 24/34] ext4: implement buffered write " Zhang Yi
2024-05-01  8:11   ` Dave Chinner
2024-05-01  8:33     ` Dave Chinner
2024-05-06 11:44       ` Zhang Yi
2024-05-06 23:19         ` Dave Chinner
2024-05-07  5:10           ` Zhang Yi [this message]
2024-05-06 11:21     ` Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 25/34] ext4: implement writeback " Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 26/34] ext4: implement mmap " Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 27/34] ext4: implement zero_range " Zhang Yi
2024-05-01  9:40   ` Dave Chinner
2024-05-06 12:33     ` Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v4 28/34] ext4: writeback partial blocks before zeroing out range Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 15:03 ` [RFC PATCH v4 29/34] ext4: fall back to buffer_head path for defrag Zhang Yi
2024-05-01  9:32   ` Dave Chinner
2024-05-06 13:05     ` Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 15:03 ` [RFC PATCH v4 30/34] ext4: partial enable iomap for regular file's buffered IO path Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 15:03 ` [RFC PATCH v4 31/34] filemap: support disable large folios on active inode Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 15:03 ` [RFC PATCH v4 32/34] ext4: enable large folio for regular file with iomap buffered IO path Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 15:03 ` [RFC PATCH v4 33/34] ext4: don't mark IOMAP_F_DIRTY for buffer write Zhang Yi
2024-05-01  9:27   ` Dave Chinner
2024-05-06 14:02     ` Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 15:03 ` [RFC PATCH v4 34/34] ext4: add mount option for buffered IO iomap path Zhang Yi
2024-04-11  1:12 ` [RESEND RFC PATCH v4 00/34] ext4: use iomap for regular file's buffered IO path and enable large folio Zhang Yi
2024-04-24  8:12 ` Zhang Yi
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-04-10 13:27 [RFC " Zhang Yi
2024-04-10 13:28 ` [RFC PATCH v4 24/34] ext4: implement buffered write iomap path Zhang Yi

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=998cae29-61c3-bb10-b05b-853edfd176b0@huaweicloud.com \
    --to=yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
    --cc=chengzhihao1@huawei.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
    --cc=yukuai3@huawei.com \
    --cc=zokeefe@google.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.