linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 00/30] fs: inode->i_version rework and optimization
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 17:54:00 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1490133240.2593.4.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170321191330.GF17872@fieldses.org>

On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 15:13 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:46:53PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 14:30 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 01:23:24PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 12:30 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > > > - It's durable; the above comparison still works if there were reboots
> > > > >   between the two i_version checks.
> > > > > 	- I don't know how realistic this is--we may need to figure out
> > > > > 	  if there's a weaker guarantee that's still useful.  Do
> > > > > 	  filesystems actually make ctime/mtime/i_version changes
> > > > > 	  atomically with the changes that caused them?  What if a
> > > > > 	  change attribute is exposed to an NFS client but doesn't make
> > > > > 	  it to disk, and then that value is reused after reboot?
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Yeah, there could be atomicity there. If we bump i_version, we'll mark
> > > > the inode dirty and I think that will end up with the new i_version at
> > > > least being journalled before __mark_inode_dirty returns.
> > > 
> > > So you think the filesystem can provide the atomicity?  In more detail:
> > > 
> > 
> > Sorry, I hit send too quickly. That should have read:
> > 
> > "Yeah, there could be atomicity issues there."
> > 
> > I think providing that level of atomicity may be difficult, though
> > maybe there's some way to make the querying of i_version block until
> > the inode update has been journalled?
> 
> No idea.  Anyway, I'd like to figure out some reasonable requirement
> that we can document.
> 
> > 
> > > 	- if I write to a file, a simultaneous reader should see either
> > > 	  (old data, old i_version) or (new data, new i_version), not a
> > > 	  combination of the two.
> > > 	- ditto for metadata modifications.
> > > 	- the same should be true if there's a crash.
> > > 
> > > (If that's not possible, then I think we could live with a brief window
> > > of (new data, old i_version) as long as it doesn't persist beyond sync?)
> > > 
> > > > That said, I suppose it is possible for us to bump the counter, hand
> > > > that new counter value out to a NFS client and then the box crashes
> > > > before it makes it to the journal.
> > > > 
> > > > Not sure how big a problem that really is.
> > > 
> > > The other case I was wondering about may have been unclear.  Represent
> > > the state of a file by a (data, i_version) pair.  Say:
> > > 
> > > 	- file is modified from (F, V) to (F', V+1).
> > > 	- client reads and caches (F', V+1).
> > > 	- server crashes before writeback, so disk still has (F, V).
> > > 	- after restart, someone else modifies file to (F'', V+1).
> > > 	- original client revalidates its cache, sees V+1, concludes
> > > 	  file data is still F'.
> > > 
> > > This may not cause a real problem for clients depending only on
> > > traditional NFS close-to-open semantics.
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > No, I think that is a legitimate problem.
> > 
> > That said, after F'', the mtime would almost certainly be different
> > from the time after F', and that would likely be enough to prevent
> > confusion in NFS clients.
> 
> Oh, good point.  So, may be worth saying that anyone wanting to make
> sense of these across reboot should compare times as well (maybe that
> should be in nfs rfc's too).  I think that should be ctime not mtime,
> though?
> 

Yes, it might be worth a mention there. IIRC, it does mention that you
shouldn't just look at a single attribute for cache validation
purposes, but the wording is a bit vague. I can't find the section at
the moment though.

The more I think about it though, simply ensuring that we don't publish
 a new change attr until the inode update has hit the journal may be
the best we can do. I'd have to think about how to implement that
though.
-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>

  reply	other threads:[~2017-03-21 22:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-12-21 17:03 Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 01/30] lustre: don't set f_version in ll_readdir Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 02/30] ecryptfs: remove unnecessary i_version bump Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 03/30] ceph: remove the bump of i_version Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 04/30] f2fs: don't bother setting i_version Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 05/30] hpfs: don't bother with the i_version counter Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 06/30] jfs: remove initialization of " Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 07/30] nilfs2: remove inode->i_version initialization Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 08/30] orangefs: remove initialization of i_version Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 09/30] reiserfs: remove unneeded i_version bump Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 10/30] ntfs: remove i_version handling Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 11/30] fs: new API for handling i_version Jeff Layton
2017-03-03 22:36   ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-03-04  0:09     ` Jeff Layton
2017-03-03 23:55   ` NeilBrown
2017-03-04  1:58     ` Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 12/30] fat: convert to new i_version API Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 13/30] affs: " Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 14/30] afs: " Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 15/30] btrfs: " Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 16/30] exofs: switch " Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 17/30] ext2: convert " Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 18/30] ext4: " Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 19/30] nfs: " Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 20/30] nfsd: " Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 21/30] ocfs2: " Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 22/30] ufs: use " Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 23/30] xfs: convert to " Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 24/30] IMA: switch IMA over " Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 25/30] fs: add a "force" parameter to inode_inc_iversion Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 26/30] fs: only set S_VERSION when updating times if it has been queried Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 27/30] xfs: avoid setting XFS_ILOG_CORE if i_version doesn't need incrementing Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 28/30] btrfs: only dirty the inode in btrfs_update_time if something was changed Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 29/30] fs: track whether the i_version has been queried with an i_state flag Jeff Layton
2017-03-04  0:03   ` NeilBrown
2017-03-04  0:43     ` Jeff Layton
2016-12-21 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 30/30] fs: convert i_version counter over to an atomic64_t Jeff Layton
2016-12-22  8:38   ` Amir Goldstein
2016-12-22 13:27     ` Jeff Layton
2017-03-04  0:00   ` NeilBrown
2016-12-22  8:45 ` [RFC PATCH v1 00/30] fs: inode->i_version rework and optimization Christoph Hellwig
2016-12-22 14:42   ` Jeff Layton
2017-03-20 21:43     ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-03-21 13:45       ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-03-21 16:30         ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-03-21 17:23           ` Jeff Layton
2017-03-21 17:37             ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-03-21 17:51               ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-03-21 18:30             ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-03-21 18:46               ` Jeff Layton
2017-03-21 19:13                 ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-03-21 21:54                   ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2017-03-29 11:15                 ` Jan Kara
2017-03-29 17:54                   ` Jeff Layton
2017-03-29 23:41                     ` Dave Chinner
2017-03-30 11:24                       ` Jeff Layton
2017-04-04 18:38                       ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-03-30  6:47                     ` Jan Kara
2017-03-30 11:11                       ` Jeff Layton
2017-03-30 16:12                         ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-03-30 18:35                           ` Jeff Layton
2017-03-30 21:11                             ` Boaz Harrosh
2017-04-04 18:31                             ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-04-05  1:43                               ` NeilBrown
2017-04-05  8:05                                 ` Jan Kara
2017-04-05 18:14                                   ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-05-11 18:59                                     ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-05-11 22:22                                       ` NeilBrown
2017-05-12 16:21                                         ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-10-30 13:21                                           ` Jeff Layton
2017-05-12  8:27                                       ` Jan Kara
2017-05-12 15:56                                         ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-05-12 11:01                                       ` Jeff Layton
2017-05-12 15:57                                         ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-04-06  1:12                                   ` NeilBrown
2017-04-06  7:22                                     ` Jan Kara
2017-04-05 17:26                                 ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-04-01 23:05                           ` Dave Chinner
2017-04-03 14:00                             ` Jan Kara
2017-04-04 12:34                               ` Dave Chinner
2017-04-04 17:53                                 ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-04-05  1:26                                 ` NeilBrown
2017-03-21 21:45             ` Dave Chinner
2017-03-22 19:53               ` Jeff Layton
2017-03-03 23:00 ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-03-04  0:53   ` Jeff Layton
2017-03-08 17:29     ` J. Bruce Fields

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=1490133240.2593.4.camel@redhat.com \
    --to=jlayton@redhat.com \
    --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.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-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: [RFC PATCH v1 00/30] fs: inode->i_version rework and optimization' \
    /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

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).