Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 9 Mar 2021 08:55:35 +1100
From:   Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc:     Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>, linux-cachefs@redhat.com,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>,
        David Wysochanski <dwysocha@redhat.com>,
        "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>,
        "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-afs@lists.infradead.org,
        Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        CIFS <linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org>,
        ceph-devel <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
        v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Subject: Re: fscache: Redesigning the on-disk cache
Message-ID: <20210308215535.GA63242@dread.disaster.area>
References: <CAOQ4uxhxwKHLT559f8v5aFTheKgPUndzGufg0E58rkEqa9oQ3Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <2653261.1614813611@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <517184.1615194835@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <517184.1615194835@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:13:55AM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > >  (0a) As (0) but using SEEK_DATA/SEEK_HOLE instead of bmap and opening the
> > >       file for every whole operation (which may combine reads and writes).
> > 
> > I read that NFSv4 supports hole punching, so when using ->bmap() or SEEK_DATA
> > to keep track of present data, it's hard to distinguish between an
> > invalid cached range and a valid "cached hole".
> 
> I wasn't exactly intending to permit caching over NFS.  That leads to fun
> making sure that the superblock you're caching isn't the one that has the
> cache in it.
> 
> However, we will need to handle hole-punching being done on a cached netfs,
> even if that's just to completely invalidate the cache for that file.
> 
> > With ->fiemap() you can at least make the distinction between a non existing
> > and an UNWRITTEN extent.
> 
> I can't use that for XFS, Ext4 or btrfs, I suspect.  Christoph and Dave's
> assertion is that the cache can't rely on the backing filesystem's metadata
> because these can arbitrarily insert or remove blocks of zeros to bridge or
> split extents.

Well, that's not the big problem. The issue that makes FIEMAP
unusable for determining if there is user data present in a file is
that on-disk extent maps aren't exactly coherent with in-memory user
data state.

That is, we can have a hole on disk with delalloc user data in
memory.  There's user data in the file, just not on disk. Same goes
for unwritten extents - there can be dirty data in memory over an
unwritten extent, and it won't get converted to written until the
data is written back and the filesystem runs a conversion
transaction.

So, yeah, if you use FIEMAP to determine where data lies in a file
that is being actively modified, you're going get corrupt data
sooner rather than later.  SEEK_HOLE/DATA are coherent with in
memory user data, so don't have this problem.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com