mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
To: djwong@kernel.org, hch@lst.de, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
	brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz, chandan.babu@oracle.com,
	david@fromorbit.com, axboe@kernel.dk
Cc: martin.petersen@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	tytso@mit.edu, jbongio@google.com, ojaswin@linux.ibm.com,
	ritesh.list@gmail.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 08/14] fs: xfs: iomap: Sub-extent zeroing
Date: Mon,  4 Mar 2024 13:04:22 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240304130428.13026-9-john.g.garry@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240304130428.13026-1-john.g.garry@oracle.com>

Set iomap->extent_shift when sub-extent zeroing is required.

We treat a sub-extent write same as an unaligned write, so we can leverage
the existing sub-FSblock unaligned write support, i.e. try a shared lock
with IOMAP_DIO_OVERWRITE_ONLY flag, if this fails then try the exclusive
lock.

In xfs_iomap_write_unwritten(), FSB calcs are now based on the extsize.

Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
---
 fs/xfs/xfs_file.c  | 28 +++++++++++++++-------------
 fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
index e33e5e13b95f..d0bd9d5f596c 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
@@ -617,18 +617,19 @@ xfs_file_dio_write_aligned(
  * Handle block unaligned direct I/O writes
  *
  * In most cases direct I/O writes will be done holding IOLOCK_SHARED, allowing
- * them to be done in parallel with reads and other direct I/O writes.  However,
- * if the I/O is not aligned to filesystem blocks, the direct I/O layer may need
- * to do sub-block zeroing and that requires serialisation against other direct
- * I/O to the same block.  In this case we need to serialise the submission of
- * the unaligned I/O so that we don't get racing block zeroing in the dio layer.
- * In the case where sub-block zeroing is not required, we can do concurrent
- * sub-block dios to the same block successfully.
+ * them to be done in parallel with reads and other direct I/O writes.
+ * However if the I/O is not aligned to filesystem blocks/extent, the direct
+ * I/O layer may need to do sub-block/extent zeroing and that requires
+ * serialisation against other direct I/O to the same block/extent.  In this
+ * case we need to serialise the submission of the unaligned I/O so that we
+ * don't get racing block/extent zeroing in the dio layer.
+ * In the case where sub-block/extent zeroing is not required, we can do
+ * concurrent sub-block/extent dios to the same block/extent successfully.
  *
  * Optimistically submit the I/O using the shared lock first, but use the
  * IOMAP_DIO_OVERWRITE_ONLY flag to tell the lower layers to return -EAGAIN
- * if block allocation or partial block zeroing would be required.  In that case
- * we try again with the exclusive lock.
+ * if block/extent allocation or partial block/extent zeroing would be
+ * required.  In that case we try again with the exclusive lock.
  */
 static noinline ssize_t
 xfs_file_dio_write_unaligned(
@@ -643,9 +644,9 @@ xfs_file_dio_write_unaligned(
 	ssize_t			ret;
 
 	/*
-	 * Extending writes need exclusivity because of the sub-block zeroing
-	 * that the DIO code always does for partial tail blocks beyond EOF, so
-	 * don't even bother trying the fast path in this case.
+	 * Extending writes need exclusivity because of the sub-block/extent
+	 * zeroing that the DIO code always does for partial tail blocks
+	 * beyond EOF, so don't even bother trying the fast path in this case.
 	 */
 	if (iocb->ki_pos > isize || iocb->ki_pos + count >= isize) {
 		if (iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_NOWAIT)
@@ -709,13 +710,14 @@ xfs_file_dio_write(
 	struct iov_iter		*from)
 {
 	struct xfs_inode	*ip = XFS_I(file_inode(iocb->ki_filp));
+	struct xfs_mount	*mp = ip->i_mount;
 	struct xfs_buftarg      *target = xfs_inode_buftarg(ip);
 	size_t			count = iov_iter_count(from);
 
 	/* direct I/O must be aligned to device logical sector size */
 	if ((iocb->ki_pos | count) & target->bt_logical_sectormask)
 		return -EINVAL;
-	if ((iocb->ki_pos | count) & ip->i_mount->m_blockmask)
+	if ((iocb->ki_pos | count) & (XFS_FSB_TO_B(mp, xfs_get_extsz(ip)) - 1))
 		return xfs_file_dio_write_unaligned(ip, iocb, from);
 	return xfs_file_dio_write_aligned(ip, iocb, from);
 }
diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c
index 70fe873951f3..88cc20bb19c9 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c
@@ -98,6 +98,7 @@ xfs_bmbt_to_iomap(
 {
 	struct xfs_mount	*mp = ip->i_mount;
 	struct xfs_buftarg	*target = xfs_inode_buftarg(ip);
+	xfs_extlen_t		extsz = xfs_get_extsz(ip);
 
 	if (unlikely(!xfs_valid_startblock(ip, imap->br_startblock)))
 		return xfs_alert_fsblock_zero(ip, imap);
@@ -134,6 +135,8 @@ xfs_bmbt_to_iomap(
 
 	iomap->validity_cookie = sequence_cookie;
 	iomap->folio_ops = &xfs_iomap_folio_ops;
+	if (extsz > 1)
+		iomap->extent_shift = ffs(extsz) - 1;
 	return 0;
 }
 
@@ -563,11 +566,19 @@ xfs_iomap_write_unwritten(
 	xfs_fsize_t	i_size;
 	uint		resblks;
 	int		error;
+	xfs_extlen_t	extsz = xfs_get_extsz(ip);
 
 	trace_xfs_unwritten_convert(ip, offset, count);
 
-	offset_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSBT(mp, offset);
-	count_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSB(mp, (xfs_ufsize_t)offset + count);
+	if (extsz > 1) {
+		xfs_extlen_t extsize_bytes = XFS_FSB_TO_B(mp, extsz);
+
+		offset_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSBT(mp, round_down(offset, extsize_bytes));
+		count_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSB(mp, round_up(offset + count, extsize_bytes));
+	} else {
+		offset_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSBT(mp, offset);
+		count_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSB(mp, (xfs_ufsize_t)offset + count);
+	}
 	count_fsb = (xfs_filblks_t)(count_fsb - offset_fsb);
 
 	/*
-- 
2.31.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-03-04 13:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-04 13:04 [PATCH v2 00/14] block atomic writes for XFS John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 01/14] block: Add blk_validate_atomic_write_op_size() John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 02/14] fs: xfs: Don't use low-space allocator for alignment > 1 John Garry
2024-03-04 22:15   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-05 13:36     ` John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 03/14] fs: xfs: Introduce FORCEALIGN inode flag John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 04/14] fs: xfs: Make file data allocations observe the 'forcealign' flag John Garry
2024-03-05  0:44   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-05 15:22     ` John Garry
2024-03-05 22:18       ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-06  9:41         ` John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 05/14] fs: xfs: Enable file data forcealign feature John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 06/14] fs: xfs: Do not free EOF blocks for forcealign John Garry
2024-03-06 21:07   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-07 11:38     ` John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 07/14] fs: iomap: Sub-extent zeroing John Garry
2024-03-06 21:14   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-07 11:51     ` John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` John Garry [this message]
2024-03-06 22:00   ` [PATCH v2 08/14] fs: xfs: " Dave Chinner
2024-03-07 12:57     ` John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 09/14] fs: Add FS_XFLAG_ATOMICWRITES flag John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 10/14] fs: iomap: Atomic write support John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 11/14] fs: xfs: Support FS_XFLAG_ATOMICWRITES for forcealign John Garry
2024-03-06 21:43   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-07 12:42     ` John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 12/14] fs: xfs: Support atomic write for statx John Garry
2024-03-06 21:31   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-07 10:35     ` John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 13/14] fs: xfs: Validate atomic writes John Garry
2024-03-06 21:22   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-07 10:19     ` John Garry
2024-03-04 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 14/14] fs: xfs: Support setting FMODE_CAN_ATOMIC_WRITE John Garry
2024-03-06 21:33   ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-07 11:55     ` John Garry

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20240304130428.13026-9-john.g.garry@oracle.com \
    --to=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=chandan.babu@oracle.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=jbongio@google.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=ojaswin@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®