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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no 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 E6ECDC433DB for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 17:04:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ml01.01.org (ml01.01.org [198.145.21.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3831B64F58 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 17:04:08 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3831B64F58 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Received: from ml01.vlan13.01.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2A8E100EB35F; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 09:04:07 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=195.135.220.15; helo=mx2.suse.de; envelope-from=rgoldwyn@suse.de; receiver= Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EADC6100EB35B for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 09:04:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77CE3ABD7; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 17:04:04 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 11:04:23 -0600 From: Goldwyn Rodrigues To: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] fsdax,xfs: Add reflink&dedupe support for fsdax Message-ID: <20210310170423.beagx4sowxpa25no@fiona> References: <20210226002030.653855-1-ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com> <20210310130227.GN3479805@casper.infradead.org> <20210310142159.kudk7q2ogp4yqn36@fiona> <20210310142643.GQ3479805@casper.infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210310142643.GQ3479805@casper.infradead.org> Message-ID-Hash: 4D326INQECKTIULH2BRC3ANQKHPIXD3I X-Message-ID-Hash: 4D326INQECKTIULH2BRC3ANQKHPIXD3I X-MailFrom: rgoldwyn@suse.de X-Mailman-Rule-Hits: nonmember-moderation X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation CC: Neal Gompa , Shiyang Ruan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-fsdevel , darrick.wong@oracle.com, jack@suse.cz, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, Btrfs BTRFS , ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com, david@fromorbit.com, hch@lst.de X-Mailman-Version: 3.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: "Linux-nvdimm developer list." Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 14:26 10/03, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 08:21:59AM -0600, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: > > On 13:02 10/03, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 07:30:41AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > Forgive my ignorance, but is there a reason why this isn't wired up to > > > > Btrfs at the same time? It seems weird to me that adding a feature > > > > > > btrfs doesn't support DAX. only ext2, ext4, XFS and FUSE have DAX support. > > > > > > If you think about it, btrfs and DAX are diametrically opposite things. > > > DAX is about giving raw access to the hardware. btrfs is about offering > > > extra value (RAID, checksums, ...), none of which can be done if the > > > filesystem isn't in the read/write path. > > > > > > That's why there's no DAX support in btrfs. If you want DAX, you have > > > to give up all the features you like in btrfs. So you may as well use > > > a different filesystem. > > > > DAX on btrfs has been attempted[1]. Of course, we could not > > But why? A completeness fetish? I don't understand why you decided > to do this work. If only I had a penny every time I heard "why would you want to do that?" > > > have checksums or multi-device with it. However, got stuck on > > associating a shared extent on the same page mapping: basically the > > TODO above dax_associate_entry(). > > > > Shiyang has proposed a way to disassociate existing mapping, but I > > don't think that is the best solution. DAX for CoW will not work until > > we have a way of mapping a page to multiple inodes (page->mapping), > > which will convert a 1-N inode-page mapping to M-N inode-page mapping. > > If you're still thinking in terms of pages, you're doing DAX wrong. > DAX should work without a struct page. Not pages specifically, but mappings. fsdax needs the mappings during the page fault and it breaks in case both files fault on the same shared extent. For Reference: WARN_ON_ONCE(page->mapping && page->mapping != mapping) in dax_disassociate_entry(). -- Goldwyn _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org