We would like to get notified when we are doing a write on mmap section.
This is needed with respect to preallocated area. We split the preallocated
area into initialzed extent and uninitialzed extent in the call back. This
let us handle ENOSPC better. Otherwise we get ENOSPC in the writepage and
that would result in data loss. The changes are also needed to handle ENOSPC
when writing to an mmap section of files with holes.
Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <[email protected]>
---
fs/ext4/file.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
fs/ext4/inode.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
include/linux/ext4_fs.h | 1 +
3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/file.c b/fs/ext4/file.c
index 20507a2..77341c1 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/file.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/file.c
@@ -123,6 +123,23 @@ force_commit:
return ret;
}
+static struct vm_operations_struct ext4_file_vm_ops = {
+ .fault = filemap_fault,
+ .page_mkwrite = ext4_page_mkwrite,
+};
+
+static int ext4_file_mmap(struct file *file, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
+{
+ struct address_space *mapping = file->f_mapping;
+
+ if (!mapping->a_ops->readpage)
+ return -ENOEXEC;
+ file_accessed(file);
+ vma->vm_ops = &ext4_file_vm_ops;
+ vma->vm_flags |= VM_CAN_NONLINEAR;
+ return 0;
+}
+
const struct file_operations ext4_file_operations = {
.llseek = generic_file_llseek,
.read = do_sync_read,
@@ -133,7 +150,7 @@ const struct file_operations ext4_file_operations = {
#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
.compat_ioctl = ext4_compat_ioctl,
#endif
- .mmap = generic_file_mmap,
+ .mmap = ext4_file_mmap,
.open = generic_file_open,
.release = ext4_release_file,
.fsync = ext4_sync_file,
diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
index 0f86bbb..42bc666 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
@@ -3493,3 +3493,18 @@ int ext4_change_inode_journal_flag(struct inode *inode, int val)
return err;
}
+
+int ext4_page_mkwrite(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct page *page)
+{
+ /*
+ * if ext4_get_block resulted in a split of an uninitialized extent,
+ * in file system full case, we will have to take the journal write
+ * access and zero out the page. The journal handle get initialized
+ * in ext4_get_block.
+ */
+ /* FIXME!! should we take inode->i_mutex ? Currently we can't because
+ * it has a circular locking dependency with DIO. But migrate expect
+ * i_mutex to ensure no i_data changes
+ */
+ return block_page_mkwrite(vma, page, ext4_get_block);
+}
diff --git a/include/linux/ext4_fs.h b/include/linux/ext4_fs.h
index 22810b1..8f5a563 100644
--- a/include/linux/ext4_fs.h
+++ b/include/linux/ext4_fs.h
@@ -1059,6 +1059,7 @@ extern void ext4_set_aops(struct inode *inode);
extern int ext4_writepage_trans_blocks(struct inode *);
extern int ext4_block_truncate_page(handle_t *handle, struct page *page,
struct address_space *mapping, loff_t from);
+extern int ext4_page_mkwrite(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct page *page);
/* ioctl.c */
extern long ext4_ioctl(struct file *, unsigned int, unsigned long);
--
1.5.4.3.422.g34cd6.dirty
On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 18:12 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> We would like to get notified when we are doing a write on mmap section.
> This is needed with respect to preallocated area. We split the preallocated
> area into initialzed extent and uninitialzed extent in the call back. This
> let us handle ENOSPC better. Otherwise we get ENOSPC in the writepage and
> that would result in data loss. The changes are also needed to handle ENOSPC
> when writing to an mmap section of files with holes.
>
Reviewed. Looks good.
Added to patch queue
Mingming
> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/ext4/file.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
> fs/ext4/inode.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
> include/linux/ext4_fs.h | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/file.c b/fs/ext4/file.c
> index 20507a2..77341c1 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/file.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/file.c
> @@ -123,6 +123,23 @@ force_commit:
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static struct vm_operations_struct ext4_file_vm_ops = {
> + .fault = filemap_fault,
> + .page_mkwrite = ext4_page_mkwrite,
> +};
> +
> +static int ext4_file_mmap(struct file *file, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> +{
> + struct address_space *mapping = file->f_mapping;
> +
> + if (!mapping->a_ops->readpage)
> + return -ENOEXEC;
> + file_accessed(file);
> + vma->vm_ops = &ext4_file_vm_ops;
> + vma->vm_flags |= VM_CAN_NONLINEAR;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> const struct file_operations ext4_file_operations = {
> .llseek = generic_file_llseek,
> .read = do_sync_read,
> @@ -133,7 +150,7 @@ const struct file_operations ext4_file_operations = {
> #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
> .compat_ioctl = ext4_compat_ioctl,
> #endif
> - .mmap = generic_file_mmap,
> + .mmap = ext4_file_mmap,
> .open = generic_file_open,
> .release = ext4_release_file,
> .fsync = ext4_sync_file,
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> index 0f86bbb..42bc666 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> @@ -3493,3 +3493,18 @@ int ext4_change_inode_journal_flag(struct inode *inode, int val)
>
> return err;
> }
> +
> +int ext4_page_mkwrite(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct page *page)
> +{
> + /*
> + * if ext4_get_block resulted in a split of an uninitialized extent,
> + * in file system full case, we will have to take the journal write
> + * access and zero out the page. The journal handle get initialized
> + * in ext4_get_block.
> + */
> + /* FIXME!! should we take inode->i_mutex ? Currently we can't because
> + * it has a circular locking dependency with DIO. But migrate expect
> + * i_mutex to ensure no i_data changes
> + */
> + return block_page_mkwrite(vma, page, ext4_get_block);
> +}
> diff --git a/include/linux/ext4_fs.h b/include/linux/ext4_fs.h
> index 22810b1..8f5a563 100644
> --- a/include/linux/ext4_fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/ext4_fs.h
> @@ -1059,6 +1059,7 @@ extern void ext4_set_aops(struct inode *inode);
> extern int ext4_writepage_trans_blocks(struct inode *);
> extern int ext4_block_truncate_page(handle_t *handle, struct page *page,
> struct address_space *mapping, loff_t from);
> +extern int ext4_page_mkwrite(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct page *page);
>
> /* ioctl.c */
> extern long ext4_ioctl(struct file *, unsigned int, unsigned long);
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 04:45:51PM -0800, Mingming Cao wrote:
> > + /* FIXME!! should we take inode->i_mutex ? Currently we can't because
> > + * it has a circular locking dependency with DIO. But migrate expect
> > + * i_mutex to ensure no i_data changes
Should I worry that we have something in the stable part of the patch
queue with this FIXME!! comment? :-)
- Ted
On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 18:29 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 04:45:51PM -0800, Mingming Cao wrote:
> > > + /* FIXME!! should we take inode->i_mutex ? Currently we can't because
> > > + * it has a circular locking dependency with DIO. But migrate expect
> > > + * i_mutex to ensure no i_data changes
>
> Should I worry that we have something in the stable part of the patch
> queue with this FIXME!! comment? :-)
>
I think this comment could be moved to the migration.c. We can't take
i_mutex on mapped IO path. The i_data_mutex is the lock that should
protect the i_data concurrent changes, which is currently mapped IO
used. The race with migration could be addressed in migration instead of
here. I propose we drop this comment for now.
Mingming
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 03:37:18PM -0800, Mingming Cao wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 18:29 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 04:45:51PM -0800, Mingming Cao wrote:
> > > > + /* FIXME!! should we take inode->i_mutex ? Currently we can't because
> > > > + * it has a circular locking dependency with DIO. But migrate expect
> > > > + * i_mutex to ensure no i_data changes
> >
> > Should I worry that we have something in the stable part of the patch
> > queue with this FIXME!! comment? :-)
> >
>
> I think this comment could be moved to the migration.c. We can't take
> i_mutex on mapped IO path. The i_data_mutex is the lock that should
> protect the i_data concurrent changes, which is currently mapped IO
> used. The race with migration could be addressed in migration instead of
> here. I propose we drop this comment for now.
OK, but that still means we have a known bug in the migration code,
which is in mainline....
- Ted