From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Evan Green <evgreen@chromium.org>
Cc: tom.leiming@gmail.com, axboe@kernel.dk,
Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@chromium.org>,
asavery@chromium.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] loop: Better discard support for block devices
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 09:28:38 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181128012837.GC11128@ming.t460p> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAE=gft55MVc7JGJw427VByihrgw1yYDFYCxuqUOh4xm5P4ZoAA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 03:34:04PM -0800, Evan Green wrote:
> Hi Ming,
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 6:55 PM Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 2:55 AM Evan Green <evgreen@chromium.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 4:06 PM Evan Green <evgreen@chromium.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If the backing device for a loop device is a block device,
> >
> > This shouldn't be a very common use case wrt. loop.
>
> Yeah, I'm starting to gather that. Or maybe I'm just the first one to
> mention it on the kernel lists ;) We've used this in our Chrome OS
> installer, I believe for many years. Gwendal piped in with a few
> reasons we do it this way on the cover letter, but in general I think
> it allows us to have a unified set of functions to install to a file,
> disk, or prepare an image that may have a different block size than
> those on the running system.
OK, got it, it makes sense.
>
> >
> > > > then mirror the discard properties of the underlying block
> > > > device into the loop device. While in there, differentiate
> > > > between REQ_OP_DISCARD and REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES, which are
> > > > different for block devices, but which the loop device had
> > > > just been lumping together.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Evan Green <evgreen@chromium.org>
> > >
> > > Any thoughts on this patch? This fixes issues for us when using a loop
> > > device backed by a block device, where we see many logs like:
> > >
> > > [ 372.767286] print_req_error: I/O error, dev loop5, sector 88125696
> >
> > Seems not see any explanation about this IO error and the fix in your patch.
> > Could you describe it a bit more?
>
> Sure, I probably should have included more context with the series.
>
> The loop device always reports that it supports discard, by setting up
> the max_discard_sectors and max_write_zeroes_sectors in the blk queue.
> When the loop device gets a discard or write-zeroes request, it turns
> around and calls fallocate on the underlying device with the
> PUNCH_HOLE flag. This makes sense when you're backed by a file and
> hoping to just deallocate the space, but may fail when you're backed
> by a block device that doesn't support discard, or doesn't write
> zeroes to discarded sectors. Weirdly, lo_discard already had some code
> for preserving EOPNOTSUPP, but then later the error is smashed into
> EIO. Patch 1 pipes out EOPNOTSUPP properly, so it doesn't get squashed
> into EIO.
>
> Patch 2 reflects the discard characteristics of the underlying device
> into the loop device. That way, if you're backed by a file or a block
> device that does support discard, everything works great, and user
> mode can even see and use the correct discard and write zero
> granularities. If you're backed by a block device that does not
> support discard, this is exposed to user mode, which then usually
> avoids calling fallocate, and doesn't feel betrayed that their
> requests are unexpectedly failing.
Thanks for your detailed explanation, and I think we need to fix it.
Thanks,
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-28 1:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-30 23:06 [PATCH 0/2] loop: Better discard for block devices Evan Green
2018-10-30 23:06 ` [PATCH 1/2] loop: Report EOPNOTSUPP properly Evan Green
2018-11-28 1:06 ` Ming Lei
2018-10-30 23:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] loop: Better discard support for block devices Evan Green
2018-11-26 18:53 ` Evan Green
2018-11-27 2:55 ` Ming Lei
2018-11-27 23:34 ` Evan Green
2018-11-28 1:28 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2018-11-28 1:26 ` Ming Lei
2018-12-04 22:19 ` Evan Green
2018-12-05 1:10 ` Ming Lei
2018-12-05 19:35 ` Evan Green
2018-12-06 0:22 ` Ming Lei
2018-12-06 3:15 ` Martin K. Petersen
2018-12-10 17:31 ` Evan Green
2018-12-18 23:48 ` Evan Green
2018-10-30 23:50 ` [PATCH 0/2] loop: Better discard " Bart Van Assche
2018-11-01 18:15 ` Evan Green
2018-11-01 22:44 ` Gwendal Grignou
2018-11-02 16:02 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-11-05 20:35 ` Evan Green
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=20181128012837.GC11128@ming.t460p \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=asavery@chromium.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=evgreen@chromium.org \
--cc=gwendal@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tom.leiming@gmail.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).