From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@hammerspace.com>,
"bfields@fieldses.org" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
"zohar@linux.ibm.com" <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
"djwong@kernel.org" <djwong@kernel.org>,
"xiubli@redhat.com" <xiubli@redhat.com>,
"brauner@kernel.org" <brauner@kernel.org>,
"linux-api@vger.kernel.org" <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
"david@fromorbit.com" <david@fromorbit.com>,
"fweimer@redhat.com" <fweimer@redhat.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"chuck.lever@oracle.com" <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
"linux-man@vger.kernel.org" <linux-man@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
"tytso@mit.edu" <tytso@mit.edu>,
"viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk" <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
"jack@suse.cz" <jack@suse.cz>,
"linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"lczerner@redhat.com" <lczerner@redhat.com>,
"adilger.kernel@dilger.ca" <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca>,
"ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [man-pages RFC PATCH v4] statx, inode: document the new STATX_INO_VERSION field
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2022 07:53:09 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <68049377014e7c4ba9552cf2913fa7de2a013f87.camel@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <166267618149.30452.1385850427092221026@noble.neil.brown.name>
On Fri, 2022-09-09 at 08:29 +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Sep 2022, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Thu, 2022-09-08 at 10:40 +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> > > On Thu, 08 Sep 2022, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2022-09-07 at 13:55 +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 2022-09-07 at 09:12 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, 2022-09-07 at 08:52 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 07, 2022 at 08:47:20AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wed, 2022-09-07 at 21:37 +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Wed, 07 Sep 2022, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > +The change to \fIstatx.stx_ino_version\fP is not atomic with
> > > > > > > > > > respect to the
> > > > > > > > > > +other changes in the inode. On a write, for instance, the
> > > > > > > > > > i_version it usually
> > > > > > > > > > +incremented before the data is copied into the pagecache.
> > > > > > > > > > Therefore it is
> > > > > > > > > > +possible to see a new i_version value while a read still
> > > > > > > > > > shows the old data.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Doesn't that make the value useless?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > No, I don't think so. It's only really useful for comparing to an
> > > > > > > > older
> > > > > > > > sample anyway. If you do "statx; read; statx" and the value
> > > > > > > > hasn't
> > > > > > > > changed, then you know that things are stable.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't see how that helps. It's still possible to get:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > reader writer
> > > > > > > ------ ------
> > > > > > > i_version++
> > > > > > > statx
> > > > > > > read
> > > > > > > statx
> > > > > > > update page cache
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > right?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yeah, I suppose so -- the statx wouldn't necessitate any locking. In
> > > > > > that case, maybe this is useless then other than for testing purposes
> > > > > > and userland NFS servers.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Would it be better to not consume a statx field with this if so? What
> > > > > > could we use as an alternate interface? ioctl? Some sort of global
> > > > > > virtual xattr? It does need to be something per-inode.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't see how a non-atomic change attribute is remotely useful even
> > > > > for NFS.
> > > > >
> > > > > The main problem is not so much the above (although NFS clients are
> > > > > vulnerable to that too) but the behaviour w.r.t. directory changes.
> > > > >
> > > > > If the server can't guarantee that file/directory/... creation and
> > > > > unlink are atomically recorded with change attribute updates, then the
> > > > > client has to always assume that the server is lying, and that it has
> > > > > to revalidate all its caches anyway. Cue endless readdir/lookup/getattr
> > > > > requests after each and every directory modification in order to check
> > > > > that some other client didn't also sneak in a change of their own.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > We generally hold the parent dir's inode->i_rwsem exclusively over most
> > > > important directory changes, and the times/i_version are also updated
> > > > while holding it. What we don't do is serialize reads of this value vs.
> > > > the i_rwsem, so you could see new directory contents alongside an old
> > > > i_version. Maybe we should be taking it for read when we query it on a
> > > > directory?
> > >
> > > We do hold i_rwsem today. I'm working on changing that. Preserving
> > > atomic directory changeinfo will be a challenge. The only mechanism I
> > > can think if is to pass a "u64*" to all the directory modification ops,
> > > and they fill in the version number at the point where it is incremented
> > > (inode_maybe_inc_iversion_return()). The (nfsd) caller assumes that
> > > "before" was one less than "after". If you don't want to internally
> > > require single increments, then you would need to pass a 'u64 [2]' to
> > > get two iversions back.
> > >
> >
> > That's a major redesign of what the i_version counter is today. It may
> > very well end up being needed, but that's going to touch a lot of stuff
> > in the VFS. Are you planning to do that as a part of your locking
> > changes?
> >
>
> "A major design"? How? The "one less than" might be, but allowing a
> directory morphing op to fill in a "u64 [2]" is just a new interface to
> existing data. One that allows fine grained atomicity.
>
> This would actually be really good for NFS. nfs_mkdir (for example)
> could easily have access to the atomic pre/post changedid provided by
> the server, and so could easily provide them to nfsd.
>
> I'm not planning to do this as part of my locking changes. In the first
> instance only NFS changes behaviour, and it doesn't provide atomic
> changeids, so there is no loss of functionality.
>
> When some other filesystem wants to opt-in to shared-locking on
> directories - that would be the time to push through a better interface.
>
I think nfsd does provide atomic changeids for directory operations
currently. AFAICT, any operation where we're changing directory contents
is done while holding the i_rwsem exclusively, and we hold that lock
over the pre and post i_version fetch for the change_info4.
If you change nfsd to allow parallel directory morphing operations
without addressing this, then I think that would be a regression.
>
> > > >
> > > > Achieving atomicity with file writes though is another matter entirely.
> > > > I'm not sure that's even doable or how to approach it if so.
> > > > Suggestions?
> > >
> > > Call inode_maybe_inc_version(page->host) in __folio_mark_dirty() ??
> > >
> >
> > Writes can cover multiple folios so we'd be doing several increments per
> > write. Maybe that's ok? Should we also be updating the ctime at that
> > point as well?
>
> You would only do several increments if something was reading the value
> concurrently, and then you really should to several increments for
> correctness.
>
Agreed.
> >
> > Fetching the i_version under the i_rwsem is probably sufficient to fix
> > this though. Most of the write_iter ops already bump the i_version while
> > holding that lock, so this wouldn't add any extra locking to the write
> > codepaths.
>
> Adding new locking doesn't seem like a good idea. It's bound to have
> performance implications. It may well end up serialising the directory
> op that I'm currently trying to make parallelisable.
>
The new locking would only be in the NFSv4 GETATTR codepath:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nfs/20220908172448.208585-9-jlayton@kernel.org/T/#u
Maybe we'd still better off taking a hit in the write codepath instead
of doing this, but with this, most of the penalty would be paid by nfsd
which I would think would be preferred here.
The problem of mmap writes is another matter though. Not sure what we
can do about that without making i_version bumps a lot more expensive.
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-09 11:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 126+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-07 11:16 [man-pages RFC PATCH v4] statx, inode: document the new STATX_INO_VERSION field Jeff Layton
2022-09-07 11:37 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-07 12:20 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-07 12:58 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-07 12:47 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-07 12:52 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-07 13:12 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-07 13:51 ` Jan Kara
2022-09-07 14:43 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-08 0:44 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-08 8:33 ` Jan Kara
2022-09-08 15:21 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-09-08 15:44 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-08 15:44 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-08 15:56 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-08 16:15 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-09-08 17:40 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-08 18:22 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-08 19:07 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-08 23:01 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-08 23:23 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-08 23:45 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-09 15:45 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-09 16:36 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-10 14:56 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-12 11:42 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-12 12:13 ` Florian Weimer
2022-09-12 12:55 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-12 13:20 ` Florian Weimer
2022-09-12 13:49 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-12 13:51 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-12 14:02 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-12 14:47 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-12 14:15 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-12 14:50 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-12 14:56 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-12 15:32 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-12 15:49 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-12 12:54 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-12 12:59 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-13 0:29 ` John Stoffel
2022-09-13 0:41 ` Dave Chinner
2022-09-13 1:49 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-13 2:41 ` Dave Chinner
2022-09-13 3:30 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-13 9:38 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-09-13 19:02 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-13 23:19 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-14 0:08 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-09 20:34 ` John Stoffel
2022-09-10 22:13 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-12 10:43 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-12 13:42 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-12 23:14 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-15 14:06 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-09-15 15:08 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-15 16:45 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-15 17:49 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-15 18:11 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-15 19:03 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-15 19:25 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-15 22:23 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-16 6:54 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-09-16 11:36 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-16 15:11 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-18 23:53 ` Dave Chinner
2022-09-19 13:13 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-20 0:16 ` Dave Chinner
2022-09-20 10:26 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-21 0:00 ` Dave Chinner
2022-09-21 10:33 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-21 21:41 ` Dave Chinner
2022-09-22 10:18 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-22 20:18 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-23 9:56 ` Jan Kara
2022-09-23 10:19 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-23 13:44 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-23 13:50 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-23 14:58 ` Frank Filz
2022-09-26 22:43 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-27 11:14 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-27 13:18 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-15 15:41 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-15 22:42 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-16 11:32 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-09 12:11 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-09-09 12:47 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-09 13:48 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-09-09 14:43 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-09 14:58 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-09-08 22:55 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-08 23:59 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-09 0:51 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-09 1:05 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-09 1:07 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-09 1:10 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-09 2:14 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-09 6:41 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-10 12:39 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-10 22:53 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-12 10:25 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-12 23:29 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-13 1:15 ` Dave Chinner
2022-09-13 1:41 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-13 19:01 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-13 23:24 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-14 11:51 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-14 22:45 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-14 23:02 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-08 22:40 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-07 13:55 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-07 14:05 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-07 15:04 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-07 15:11 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-08 0:40 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-08 11:34 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-08 22:29 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-09 11:53 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2022-09-10 22:58 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-10 19:46 ` Al Viro
2022-09-10 23:00 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-08 0:31 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-08 0:41 ` Trond Myklebust
2022-09-08 0:53 ` NeilBrown
2022-09-08 11:37 ` Jeff Layton
2022-09-08 12:40 ` Trond Myklebust
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=68049377014e7c4ba9552cf2913fa7de2a013f87.camel@kernel.org \
--to=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=lczerner@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=trondmy@hammerspace.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=xiubli@redhat.com \
--cc=zohar@linux.ibm.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).