Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753277Ab0KIEWg (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Nov 2010 23:22:36 -0500 Received: from bld-mail20.adl6.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.105]:47655 "EHLO mail.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753078Ab0KIEWc (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Nov 2010 23:22:32 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 15:21:56 +1100 From: Dave Chinner To: Josef Bacik Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, joel.becker@oracle.com, cmm@us.ibm.com, cluster-devel@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] XFS: handle hole punching via fallocate properly Message-ID: <20101109042156.GG2715@dastard> References: <1289248327-16308-1-git-send-email-josef@redhat.com> <1289248327-16308-2-git-send-email-josef@redhat.com> <20101109012254.GE2715@dastard> <20101109020509.GB27816@dhcp231-156.rdu.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101109020509.GB27816@dhcp231-156.rdu.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4542 Lines: 124 On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 09:05:09PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote: > On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 12:22:54PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 03:32:03PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote: > > > This patch simply allows XFS to handle the hole punching flag in fallocate > > > properly. I've tested this with a little program that does a bunch of random > > > hole punching with FL_KEEP_SIZE and without it to make sure it does the right > > > thing. Thanks, > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik > > > --- > > > fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_iops.c | 12 +++++++++--- > > > 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_iops.c b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_iops.c > > > index 96107ef..99df347 100644 > > > --- a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_iops.c > > > +++ b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_iops.c > > > @@ -516,6 +516,7 @@ xfs_vn_fallocate( > > > loff_t new_size = 0; > > > xfs_flock64_t bf; > > > xfs_inode_t *ip = XFS_I(inode); > > > + int cmd = XFS_IOC_RESVSP; > > > > > > /* preallocation on directories not yet supported */ > > > error = -ENODEV; > > > @@ -528,17 +529,22 @@ xfs_vn_fallocate( > > > > > > xfs_ilock(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL); > > > > > > + if (mode & FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE) > > > + cmd = XFS_IOC_UNRESVSP; > > > + > > > /* check the new inode size is valid before allocating */ > > > if (!(mode & FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE) && > > > offset + len > i_size_read(inode)) { > > > - new_size = offset + len; > > > + if (cmd == XFS_IOC_UNRESVSP) > > > + new_size = offset; > > > + else > > > + new_size = offset + len; > > > > What semantic is FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE supposed to convey during a > > hole punch? Doesn't this just turn the hole punch operation into > > a truncate? If so, what's the point of punching the hole when you > > can just call ftruncate() to get the same result? > > > > Well your UNRESVSP can do the same thing as a ftruncate Actually, it can't because it leaves the file size unchanged. Like XFS_IOC_RESVSP, the use case is to allow punching out pre-allocated blocks beyond EOF (that were put there by XFS_IOC_RESVSP). e.g: # xfs_io -f \ > -c "truncate 20k" \ > -c "resvsp 16k 16k" \ > -c "unresvsp 24k 4k" \ > -c "bmap -v" \ > -c "stat" \ > test.out test.out: EXT: FILE-OFFSET BLOCK-RANGE AG AG-OFFSET TOTAL FLAGS 0: [0..31]: hole 32 1: [32..47]: 136..151 0 (136..151) 16 10000 2: [48..55]: hole 8 3: [56..63]: 160..167 0 (160..167) 8 10000 fd.path = "test.out" fd.flags = non-sync,non-direct,read-write stat.ino = 134 stat.type = regular file stat.size = 20480 stat.blocks = 24 fsxattr.xflags = 0x2 [prealloc] fsxattr.projid = 0 fsxattr.extsize = 0 fsxattr.nextents = 2 fsxattr.naextents = 0 dioattr.mem = 0x200 dioattr.miniosz = 512 dioattr.maxiosz = 2147483136 # Which leaves us witha file size of 20k and two unwritten extents from 16-24k and 28-32k. > so I figured it was ok > to just go ahead and use it rather than add complexity, especially since I don't > understand this crazy fs of yours ;). Ask, and ye shall receive enlightenment. :) > > I'd suggest that FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE should, by definition, not > > change the file size, and have no option to be able to change it. > > This needs to be defined and documented - can you include a man > > page update in this series that defines the expected behaviour > > of FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE? > > Oh I see you mean don't allow hole punch to change the size at all. Exactly. If you can preallocate beyond EOF, then you need to be able to punch beyond EOF, too. The only other way to remove persistent preallocation beyond EOF is to truncate, but that doesn't allow you to only punch specific ranges beyond EOF... > I was thinking of doing this originally, but like I said above I > figured that there was no harm in doing the equivalent of an > ftruncate. But you are right, theres no sense in duplicating > functionality, I'll change it to keep PUNCH_HOLE from changin the > size. Now I just need to figure out where that man page is... >From the man page: http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com -- 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/