Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965225AbXBTQLS (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Feb 2007 11:11:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965332AbXBTQLS (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Feb 2007 11:11:18 -0500 Received: from agminet01.oracle.com ([141.146.126.228]:19861 "EHLO agminet01.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965225AbXBTQLR (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Feb 2007 11:11:17 -0500 Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 11:08:54 -0500 From: Chris Mason To: Trond Myklebust Cc: Benjamin LaHaise , "Ananiev, Leonid I" , Zach Brown , linux-aio@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Suparna bhattacharya , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] aio: propogate post-EIOCBQUEUED errors to completion event Message-ID: <20070220160854.GO6133@think.oraclecorp.com> References: <20070219203527.20419.68418.sendpatchset@tetsuo.zabbo.net> <20070219215048.GI6133@think.oraclecorp.com> <20070220002109.GG31205@kvack.org> <1171987310.6271.23.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1171987310.6271.23.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14 X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2043 Lines: 40 On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 11:01:50AM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Mon, 2007-02-19 at 19:21 -0500, Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 04:50:48PM -0500, Chris Mason wrote: > > > aio is not responsible for this particular synchronization. Those fixes > > > (if we make them) should come from other places. The patch is important > > > to get aio error handling right. > > > > > > I would argue that one common cause of the EIO is userland > > > error (mmap concurrent with O_DIRECT), and EIO is the correct answer. > > > > I disagree. That means that using the pagecache to synchronize things like > > the proposed online defragmentation will occasionally make O_DIRECT users > > fail. O_DIRECT doesn't prevent the sysadmin from copying files or other > > page cache uses, which implies that generating an error in these cases is > > horrifically broken. If only root could do it, I wouldn't complain, but > > this would seem to imply that user vs root holes still exist. > > We don't try to resolve "conflicting" writes between ordinary mmap() and > write(), so why should we be doing it for mmap and O_DIRECT? > > mmap() is designed to violate the ordinary mutex locks for write(), so > if a conflict arises, whether it be with O_DIRECT or ordinary writes > then it is a case of "last writer wins". There are some strange O_DIRECT corner cases in here such that the 'last writer' may actually be a 'last reader' and winning can mean have a copy of the page in page cache older than the copy on disk. One option is to have invalidate_inode_pages2_range continue if it can't toss a page but still return something that O_DIRECT ignores (living with the race), but it looks like I can make a launder_page op that does the right thing. I'll give it a shot. -chris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/