From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/3] Move the file data to the new blocks Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 01:45:29 -0800 Message-ID: <20070208014529.d990b502.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20070116210520sho@rifu.tnes.nec.co.jp> <20070205131204.GA15596@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20070206173520.7719a7de.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070207204657.GC6565@schatzie.adilger.int> <20070207125659.bc27404d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070208092945.GA10973@duck.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andreas Dilger , sho@tnes.nec.co.jp, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Kara Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20070208092945.GA10973@duck.suse.cz> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 10:29:45 +0100 Jan Kara wrote: > On Wed 07-02-07 12:56:59, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 13:46:57 -0700 > > Andreas Dilger wrote: > > > > > On Feb 06, 2007 17:35 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > On Mon, 5 Feb 2007 14:12:04 +0100 > > > > Jan Kara wrote: > > > > > > Move the blocks on the temporary inode to the original inode > > > > > > by a page. > > > > > > 1. Read the file data from the old blocks to the page > > > > > > 2. Move the block on the temporary inode to the original inode > > > > > > 3. Write the file data on the page into the new blocks > > > > > I have one thing - it's probably not good to use page cache for > > > > > defragmentation. > > > > > > > > Then it is no longer online defragmentation. The issues with maintaining > > > > correctness and coherency with ongoing VFS activity would be truly ghastly. > > > > > > > > If we're worried about pagecache pollution then it would be better to control > > > > that from userspace via fadvise(). > > > > > > It should be possible to have the online defrag tool lock the inode against > > > any changes, > > > > Sounds easy when you say it fast. But how do we "lock" against, say, a > > read pagefault? Only by writing back then removing the pagecache page then > > reinstantiating it as a locked, not-uptodate page and then removing it from > > pagecache afterwards prior to unlocking it. Or something. > > > > I don't think we want to go there. > I though Andreas meant "any write changes" - i.e. you check that noone > has open file descriptor for writing and block any new open for writing. > That can be done quite easily. > Anyway, I agree with you that userspace solution to a possible page > cache pollution is preferable after thinking about it for a while. > As I've been thinking about it, we could actually do the copying > from user space. We could do something like: > block any writes to file (as I described above) > craft new inode with blocks allocated as we want (using preallocation, > we should mostly have the kernel infrastructure we need) > copy data using splice syscall > call the kernel to switch data > I don't think we need to block any writes to any file or anything. To move a page within a file: fd = open(file); p = mmap(fd); the_page_was_in_core = mincore(p, offset); munmap(p); ioctl(fd, ..., new_block); read_cache_page(inode, offset); lock_page(page); if (try_to_free_buffers(page)) { set_page_dirty(page); } unlock_page(page); if (the_page_was_in_core) { sync_file_range(fd, offset SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WAIT_BEFORE| SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WRITE| SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WAIT_AFTER); fadvise(fd, offset, FADV_DONTNEED); } completely coherent with pagecache, quite safe in the presence of mmap, mlock, O_DIRECT, everything else. Also fully journallable in-kernel.