From: Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Trond Myklebust <trondmy@hammerspace.com>,
"dhowells@redhat.com" <dhowells@redhat.com>,
"lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org>, "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>,
"miklos@szeredi.hu" <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] Allowing linkat() to replace the destination
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 14:10:03 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200122221003.GB394361@vader> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxgsoGMsNxhmtzZPqb+NshpJ3_P8vDiKpJFO5ZK25jZr0w@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 08:57:01AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 1:05 AM Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 02:20:32AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 05:17:34PM -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> > > > > No. This is completely wrong; just make it ->link_replace() and be done
> > > > > with that; no extra arguments and *always* the same conditions wrt
> > > > > positive/negative. One of the reasons why ->rename() tends to be
> > > > > ugly (and a source of quite a few bugs over years) are those "if
> > > > > target is positive/if target is negative" scattered over the instances.
> > > > >
> > > > > Make the choice conditional upon the positivity of target.
> > > >
> > > > Yup, you already convinced me that ->link_replace() is better in your
> > > > last email.
> > >
> > > FWIW, that might be not so simple ;-/ Reason: NFS-like stuff. Client
> > > sees a negative in cache; the problem is how to decide whether to
> > > tell the server "OK, I want normal link()" vs. "if it turns out that
> > > someone has created it by the time you see the request, give do
> > > a replacing link". Sure, if could treat ->link() telling you -EEXIST
> > > as "OK, repeat it with ->link_replace(), then", but that's an extra
> > > roundtrip...
> >
> > So that's a point in favor of ->link(). But then if we overload ->link()
> > instead of adding ->link_replace() and we want EOPNOTSUPP to fail fast,
> > we need to add something like FMODE_SUPPORTS_AT_REPLACE.
> >
> > Some options I see are:
> >
> > 1. Go with ->link_replace() until network filesystem specs support
> > AT_REPLACE. That would be a bit of a mess down the line, though.
> > 2. Stick with ->link(), let the filesystem implementations deal with the
> > positive targets, and add FMODE_SUPPORTS_AT_REPLACE so that feature
> > detection remains easy for userspace.
>
> "detection remains easy..." why is this important?
As I mentioned, I don't think it's necessary given the precedent.
However, Al voiced some concern over this earlier in the thread:
---
> > > 7) how do users tell if filesystem supports that? And no,
> > >references to pathconf, Cthulhu and other equally delightful entities
> > >are not really welcome.
> >
> > EOPNOTSUPP is probably the most helpful.
>
> Umm... What would you feed it, though? You need to get past your
> "links to the same file, do nothing" escape...
---
> Do you know of a userspace application that would have a problem checking
> if AT_REPLACE works, fall back to whatever and never try it ever again?
>
> Besides, when said application tried to open an O_TMPFILE and fail, it
> will have already detected a lot of the unsupported cases.
> Sorry for not reading all the thread again, some API questions:
> - We intend to allow AT_REPLACE only with O_TMPFILE src. Right?
I wasn't planning on having that restriction. It's not too much effort
for filesystems to support it for normal files, so I wouldn't want to
place an artificial restriction on a useful primitive.
> - Does AT_REPLACE assert that destination is positive? and if so why?
No, it should work like a normal link() if the destination doesn't
exist.
> The functionality that is complement to atomic rename would be atomic
> link, destination could be positive or negative, but end results will be
> that destination is positive with new inode.
> With those semantics, ->link_replace() makes much less sense IMO.
>
> > 3. Option 2, but don't bother with FMODE_SUPPORTS_AT_REPLACE.
> >
> > FWIW, there is precendent for option 3: RENAME_EXCHANGE. That has the
> > same "files are the same" noop condition, and we don't know whether
> > RENAME_EXCHANGE is supported until ->rename(). A cursory search shows
> > that applications using RENAME_EXCHANGE try it and fall back to a
> > non-atomic exchange on EINVAL. They could do the exact same thing for
> > AT_REPLACE.
> >
>
> That sounds like the most reasonable approach to me. Let's not over complicate.
> If you find that creates too much generic logic in ->link(), you can take
> the approach Darrick employed with generic_remap_file_range_prep() for
> filesystems that want to support AT_REPLACE. All other fs just need to check
> for valid flags mask, like the ->rename() precedent.
>
> Another side discussion about passing AT_ flags down to filesystems.
> Traditionally, that was never done, until AT_STATX_ mixed vfs flags
> with filesystem flags on the same AT_ namespace.
> Now we have linkat() syscall that can take only AT_ vfs flags and
> renameat2() syscall that can take only RENAME_ filesystem flags not
> from the AT_ namespace.
> I feel that the situation of having AT_REPLACE API along with
> RENAME_EXCHANGE and RENAME_NOREPLACE is a bit awkward
> and some standardization is in order.
>
> According to include/uapi/linux/fcntl.h, there is no numeric collision
> between the RENAME_ flag namepsace and AT_ flags namespace,
> although I do find it suspicious that AT_ flags start at 0x100...
> Could we define AT_RENAME_xxx RENAME_xxx flags and name the
> new flag AT_LINK_REPLACE, so it is a bit more clear that the flag
> is specific to link(2) syscall and not vfs generic AT_ flag.
Sure, I'll rename it to AT_LINK_REPLACE. AT_RENAME_xxx is probably for a
separate series.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-22 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-17 12:49 [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] Allowing linkat() to replace the destination David Howells
2020-01-17 14:33 ` Trond Myklebust
2020-01-17 15:46 ` Al Viro
2020-01-17 16:12 ` Trond Myklebust
2020-01-17 16:48 ` Al Viro
2020-01-17 16:36 ` Omar Sandoval
2020-01-17 16:59 ` Al Viro
2020-01-17 17:28 ` Omar Sandoval
2020-01-17 18:17 ` Al Viro
2020-01-17 20:22 ` Omar Sandoval
2020-01-17 22:22 ` Al Viro
2020-01-17 23:54 ` Omar Sandoval
2020-01-18 0:47 ` Al Viro
2020-01-18 1:17 ` Omar Sandoval
2020-01-18 2:20 ` Al Viro
2020-01-21 23:05 ` Omar Sandoval
2020-01-22 6:57 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-01-22 22:10 ` Omar Sandoval [this message]
2020-01-23 3:47 ` Al Viro
2020-01-23 7:16 ` Dave Chinner
2020-01-23 7:47 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-01-24 21:25 ` Dave Chinner
2020-01-31 5:24 ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-01-31 5:29 ` hch
2020-01-31 7:00 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-01-31 20:33 ` Omar Sandoval
2020-01-31 21:55 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-01-28 1:27 ` Omar Sandoval
2020-01-28 14:35 ` David Howells
2020-01-31 5:31 ` hch
2020-01-31 8:04 ` David Howells
2020-01-31 8:56 ` Amir Goldstein
2020-01-22 9:53 ` David Howells
2020-01-17 14:47 ` David Howells
2020-01-17 14:56 ` Trond Myklebust
2020-01-17 16:01 ` Al Viro
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=20200122221003.GB394361@vader \
--to=osandov@osandov.com \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=trondmy@hammerspace.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).