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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31C47C433DF for ; Sun, 24 May 2020 16:30:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B40AB20787 for ; Sun, 24 May 2020 16:30:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="nmQu6o8G" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B40AB20787 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.dk Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id E7DAB80008; Sun, 24 May 2020 12:30:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id E2F9280007; Sun, 24 May 2020 12:30:46 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id CD21D80008; Sun, 24 May 2020 12:30:46 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0020.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.20]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6D0380007 for ; Sun, 24 May 2020 12:30:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin05.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6335E824556B for ; Sun, 24 May 2020 16:30:46 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76852151292.05.feet54_7b15f4df0c745 X-HE-Tag: feet54_7b15f4df0c745 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 6805 Received: from mail-pj1-f65.google.com (mail-pj1-f65.google.com [209.85.216.65]) by imf23.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Sun, 24 May 2020 16:30:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pj1-f65.google.com with SMTP id z15so3327559pjb.0 for ; Sun, 24 May 2020 09:30:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JN/e+A9ktyHXM8zsyrn02aJMxhSbMiH8/CW921mNbJc=; b=nmQu6o8G5J+l4W4zBcQp+jsl3Uw+smSVCJtpS5T4yTJA1GGwd8/BAGRhBqMPopGKIO KWVANpynxh85QYUvlV5rO8XjAPqs//u8yPnD1I5y6NTb8H3mCizC8VVC2x33wBncbGZk +35uSLRNn9+PyaGO4oGDCOrdUiKMq86a2LKXF1k7S24lQwLtyoiZyKxu/olMYC8dpv7D VW9av1A11ah7C3/YFl3fo4X6OZK/UacH6xrxHnj6V0bam5MU/qHdAOqdN2yqgwluSqMy sTvxfgXqVT7aUwQXOND45i9ojAn7Qpk8fDNxaZW5dQym4SPC5SFhMKop7cJ8SrmLYhLu TKOA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=JN/e+A9ktyHXM8zsyrn02aJMxhSbMiH8/CW921mNbJc=; b=Bw/uitkahcdFc6ROqIh+KfTW/wglF7/f6Z1xYSqyd3kJwQSNZXeqVfXX/mKgNp+EHM TIBA7mwT3OuYGNXeq+XGAW/Lcl9SD5yM3XyyGOllzIPlcJbLCnjTLxtCib0Ny6PbEqrk qemX6Ytbc3Fg294yweCS9SURpxUXkY1mIhIqwvmknaFvoiVW8TVpAhmkFsyDjvRIgJgs hADf5xk+zxf507kuZujJdcUyaf6mijnzftSL75Xo6mHPaD2+s74ljYhnQ8tMylkFQlz2 UhJ5W9HPphuKrsAhMNPKpEU5vh+Yc3ZNP57Qv+DjBgpoPhrvx5RpJ4UsXcd3F/a23pBg 8PRQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5322BZqU5RCP4hKlb40r1OVom9RpF73XXJ+3zA6a6H9AJauEa4Al CGnfM28/eKcPkjvFFqLgM2oJbQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyAnCWSpBZuHzIMhJn2QD1jU6hTg5Vw1EN325mx9Y5SVQek+j7ZmlgXjm+POf7NuknYCtKFwg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:890b:: with SMTP id u11mr5692496pjn.233.1590337844549; Sun, 24 May 2020 09:30:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2605:e000:100e:8c61:8568:4ec4:ebd3:32d1? ([2605:e000:100e:8c61:8568:4ec4:ebd3:32d1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id go1sm10608240pjb.26.2020.05.24.09.30.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 24 May 2020 09:30:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/12] mm: support async buffered reads in generic_file_buffered_read() To: Trond Myklebust , "io-uring@vger.kernel.org" Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" References: <20200523185755.8494-1-axboe@kernel.dk> <20200523185755.8494-6-axboe@kernel.dk> <264614fc4fa08df2b0899da1cd38bb07150cd7f3.camel@hammerspace.com> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <2fa7104a-ea85-55f2-692c-514eb3b88a88@kernel.dk> Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 10:30:42 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <264614fc4fa08df2b0899da1cd38bb07150cd7f3.camel@hammerspace.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 5/24/20 8:05 AM, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Sat, 2020-05-23 at 12:57 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> Use the async page locking infrastructure, if IOCB_WAITQ is set in >> the >> passed in iocb. The caller must expect an -EIOCBQUEUED return value, >> which means that IO is started but not done yet. This is similar to >> how >> O_DIRECT signals the same operation. Once the callback is received by >> the caller for IO completion, the caller must retry the operation. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe >> --- >> mm/filemap.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- >> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c >> index c746541b1d49..a3b86c9acdc8 100644 >> --- a/mm/filemap.c >> +++ b/mm/filemap.c >> @@ -1219,6 +1219,14 @@ static int __wait_on_page_locked_async(struct >> page *page, >> return ret; >> } >> >> +static int wait_on_page_locked_async(struct page *page, >> + struct wait_page_queue *wait) >> +{ >> + if (!PageLocked(page)) >> + return 0; >> + return __wait_on_page_locked_async(compound_head(page), wait, >> false); >> +} >> + >> /** >> * put_and_wait_on_page_locked - Drop a reference and wait for it to >> be unlocked >> * @page: The page to wait for. >> @@ -2058,17 +2066,25 @@ static ssize_t >> generic_file_buffered_read(struct kiocb *iocb, >> index, last_index - index); >> } >> if (!PageUptodate(page)) { >> - if (iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_NOWAIT) { >> - put_page(page); >> - goto would_block; >> - } >> - >> /* >> * See comment in do_read_cache_page on why >> * wait_on_page_locked is used to avoid >> unnecessarily >> * serialisations and why it's safe. >> */ >> - error = wait_on_page_locked_killable(page); >> + if (iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_WAITQ) { >> + if (written) { >> + put_page(page); >> + goto out; >> + } >> + error = wait_on_page_locked_async(page, >> + iocb- >>> private); > > If it is being used in 'generic_file_buffered_read()' as storage for a > wait queue, then it is hard to consider this a 'private' field. private isn't the prettiest, and in fact this one in particular is a bit of a mess. It's not clear if it's caller or callee owned. It's generally not used, outside of the old usb gadget code, iomap O_DIRECT, and ocfs2. With FMODE_BUF_RASYNC, the fs obviously can't set it if it uses ->private for buffered IO. > Perhaps either rename and add type checking, or else add a separate > field altogether to struct kiocb? I'd hate to add a new field and increase the size of the kiocb... One alternative is to do: union { void *private; struct wait_page_queue *ki_waitq; }; and still use IOCB_WAITQ to say that ->ki_waitq is valid. There's also 4 bytes of padding in the kiocb struct. And some fields are only used for O_DIRECT as well, eg ->ki_cookie which is just used for polled O_DIRECT. So we could also do: union { unsigned int ki_cookie; struct wait_page_queue *ki_waitq; }; and still not grow the kiocb. How about we go with this approach, and also add: if (kiocb->ki_flags & IOCB_HIPRI) return -EOPNOTSUPP; to kiocb_wait_page_queue_init() to make sure that this combination isn't valid? -- Jens Axboe