Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v2] f2fs: add F2FS_IOC_SEC_TRIM_FILE ioctl

[Daeho Jeong <daeho43@gmail.com>]

For the incremental way of erasing, we might as well support the
(offset, length) option in a unit of 4KiB.

So, you might use this ioctl like the below. Does it work for you?
struct f2fs_sec_trim {
        u64 startblk;
        u64 blklen;
        u32 flags;
};

sectrim.startblk = 0;
sectrim.blklen = 256;     // 1MiB
sectrim.flags = F2FS_TRIM_FILE_DISCARD | F2FS_TRIM_FILE_ZEROOUT;
ret = ioctl(fd, F2FS_SEC_TRIM_FILE, &sectrim);

2020년 6월 12일 (금) 오전 8:00, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>님이 작성:

>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 07:49:12AM +0900, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> > 2020년 6월 12일 (금) 오전 1:27, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>님이 작성:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 12:16:52PM +0900, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> > > > +     for (index = pg_start; index < pg_end;) {
> > > > +             struct dnode_of_data dn;
> > > > +             unsigned int end_offset;
> > > > +
> > > > +             set_new_dnode(&dn, inode, NULL, NULL, 0);
> > > > +             ret = f2fs_get_dnode_of_data(&dn, index, LOOKUP_NODE);
> > > > +             if (ret)
> > > > +                     goto out;
> > > > +
> > > > +             end_offset = ADDRS_PER_PAGE(dn.node_page, inode);
> > > > +             if (pg_end < end_offset + index)
> > > > +                     end_offset = pg_end - index;
> > > > +
> > > > +             for (; dn.ofs_in_node < end_offset;
> > > > +                             dn.ofs_in_node++, index++) {
> > > > +                     struct block_device *cur_bdev;
> > > > +                     block_t blkaddr = f2fs_data_blkaddr(&dn);
> > > > +
> > > > +                     if (__is_valid_data_blkaddr(blkaddr)) {
> > > > +                             if (!f2fs_is_valid_blkaddr(F2FS_I_SB(inode),
> > > > +                                     blkaddr, DATA_GENERIC_ENHANCE)) {
> > > > +                                     ret = -EFSCORRUPTED;
> > > > +                                     goto out;
> > > > +                             }
> > > > +                     } else
> > > > +                             continue;
> > > > +
> > > > +                     cur_bdev = f2fs_target_device(sbi, blkaddr, NULL);
> > > > +                     if (f2fs_is_multi_device(sbi)) {
> > > > +                             int i = f2fs_target_device_index(sbi, blkaddr);
> > > > +
> > > > +                             blkaddr -= FDEV(i).start_blk;
> > > > +                     }
> > > > +
> > > > +                     if (len) {
> > > > +                             if (prev_bdev == cur_bdev &&
> > > > +                                     blkaddr == prev_block + len) {
> > > > +                                     len++;
> > > > +                             } else {
> > > > +                                     ret = f2fs_secure_erase(prev_bdev,
> > > > +                                                     prev_block, len, flags);
> > > > +                                     if (ret)
> > > > +                                             goto out;
> > > > +
> > > > +                                     len = 0;
> > > > +                             }
> > > > +                     }
> > > > +
> > > > +                     if (!len) {
> > > > +                             prev_bdev = cur_bdev;
> > > > +                             prev_block = blkaddr;
> > > > +                             len = 1;
> > > > +                     }
> > > > +             }
> > > > +
> > > > +             f2fs_put_dnode(&dn);
> > > > +     }
> > >
> > > This loop processes the entire file, which may be very large.  So it could take
> > > a very long time to execute.
> > >
> > > It should at least use the following to make the task killable and preemptible:
> > >
> > >                 if (fatal_signal_pending(current)) {
> > >                         err = -EINTR;
> > >                         goto out;
> > >                 }
> > >                 cond_resched();
> > >
> >
> > Good point!
> >
> > > Also, perhaps this ioctl should be made incremental, i.e. take in an
> > > (offset, length) like pwrite()?
> > >
> > > - Eric
> >
> > Discard and Zeroing will be treated in a unit of block, which is 4KB
> > in F2FS case.
> > Do you really need the (offset, length) option here even if the unit
> > is a 4KB block? I guess this option might make the user even
> > inconvenienced to use this ioctl, because they have to bear 4KB
> > alignment in mind.
>
> The ioctl as currently proposed always erases the entire file, which could be
> gigabytes.  That could take a very long time.
>
> I'm suggesting considering making it possible to call the ioctl multiple times
> to process the file incrementally, like you would do with write() or pwrite().
>
> That implies that for each ioctl call, the length would need to be specified
> unless it's hardcoded to 4KiB which would be very inefficient.  Users would
> probably want to process a larger amount at a time, like 1 MiB, right?
>
> Likewise the offset would need to be specified as well, unless it were to be
> taken implicitly from f_pos.
>
> - Eric