From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7131C4338F for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 08:59:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88AAE6109F for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 08:59:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236140AbhHSJAV (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Aug 2021 05:00:21 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50570 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229990AbhHSJAR (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Aug 2021 05:00:17 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x435.google.com (mail-wr1-x435.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::435]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 636A3C061575 for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 01:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x435.google.com with SMTP id v4so7842235wro.12 for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 01:59:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:date:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=uVCUyG2NuSIGcMkq0WuvNZ15TJ1vZGR///Ye476yofU=; b=KI0EaoIHCCtmAfSlWmcLr/ObZuekZhkwWEKURpSz4ItXaOXjyCdLXn9KWaWRBcmCgB qSfR57ZurpkJJY0m9Lg1RmcXVNZbQUUAMZadH/Ooz3pSTGVwHqbftl5+QBpMsw02cZ8i yjR2hjJbyC3KRbq9JQEAeUqkhPCiXgWTL85jOIt2KJUxsIY0QnZAUK55BHdezuyS7D8u DoOD/CvZ2nldKe/6xuQ/bLigBrMtEgDKbNKG5FjO3OHcIHiLi2A9utHfWOmnVAOBe8Pb zJJtjn7kgX25+GrQ04vKCt7KtyIPAGQp6Na+wRwZGk9Rxkce9Ml5ZWy2lEJ8TiRGdQ0a +i7A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=uVCUyG2NuSIGcMkq0WuvNZ15TJ1vZGR///Ye476yofU=; b=PM3MBPSLw1VPQq/JnaPeCeFOLkL7n+uCzS4d5DQUzy/IfJXKZFC9227kiz9B5Qv34A vda+Cbfp+mz3pGB9LuPc1JM6GC122GurDqG8S5esMlge0RRkmYgOaJm3TxvcMfZIBRkq KhX+L0Il92wwr3rmeQsGbyN+RoFkiqStMHHuXEKHPRCkCb/s5/VyYp2dZww/iRcaqBfy 0d4Nm6hYcIrSFlGdKz5iskzuga0mIlTPzo02tkPAYj01afocjKHRWFl9am+LJqnf5vnG oRhI6v9KOOtT8SJqWaFmcZ9ILzaIb98GVl6tcPbkS92Y+EvC7zP9I0tyYQ9sJBBRtR4I vVIw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531eytz+uEYI6ZZxPRfw/6ROQHRTYR8C5qIfB15TSdFztSn7scgn oAFF8b27ki14MyOtp/M4ALlHvAm9/MU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz5HqPdhNwnLJ2lHu65HFgwpMni8O/WP9YdzyTXUBy1TcyTAjtHhYOipMS4VPFtw9ftfH28Uw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:494d:: with SMTP id r13mr2416465wrs.12.1629363578975; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 01:59:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from saturne.home ([2a01:cb1d:16b:7e00:d8a9:a24:4997:14eb]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v5sm1336520wru.37.2021.08.19.01.59.37 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 19 Aug 2021 01:59:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Laurent Stacul X-Google-Original-From: Laurent Stacul Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 10:59:34 +0200 To: Vito Caputo , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: XFS/mmap reflink file question Message-ID: References: <20210817221258.jb4pg77bdle7t2oj@shells.gnugeneration.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210817221258.jb4pg77bdle7t2oj@shells.gnugeneration.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 03:12:58PM -0700, Vito Caputo wrote: >On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 02:19:12PM +0200, Laurent Stacul wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I spent much time digging into the mmap mechanism and I don't have a clear view >> on mmap'ing a file and a reflink to this file would be mapped twice in memory >> (this only applies in case the filesystem supports reflink feature like XFS). >> >> To describe my tests, I generate a file stored on an XFS partition and create a >> reflink of it: >> >> % dd if=/dev/zero of=./output.dat bs=1M count=24 >> % cp --reflink -v output.dat output2.dat >> % xfs_bmap -v output.dat >> output.dat: >> EXT: FILE-OFFSET BLOCK-RANGE AG AG-OFFSET TOTAL >> 0: [0..49151]: 3756776..3805927 0 (3756776..3805927) 49152 100000 >> % xfs_bmap -v output2.dat >> output2.dat: >> EXT: FILE-OFFSET BLOCK-RANGE AG AG-OFFSET TOTAL >> 0: [0..49151]: 3756776..3805927 0 (3756776..3805927) 49152 100000 >> >> Then I mmap the first file twice using vmtouch tool: >> >> % vmtouch -l output.dat& >> [1] 15870 >> LOCKED 6144 pages (24M) >> % vmtouch -l output.dat& >> [2] 15872 >> LOCKED 6144 pages (24M) >> % pmap -X 15872 | grep -e 'Pss' -e 'output' | awk '{if(NR>1)printf("%16s %4s %6s %10s %10s %10s\n", $1, $2, $4, $5, $7, $8)}' >> Address Perm Device Inode Rss Pss >> 7fcbb9eb9000 r--s fc:10 3755268 24576 12288 >> >> As we can see the Proportional Set Size is as expected the half of the Resident >> Set Size because the memory is shared by the two processes. Now, I mmap the >> reflink `output2.dat' of 'output.dat': >> >> % vmtouch -l output2.dat& >> [3] 15892 >> LOCKED 6144 pages (24M) >> % pmap -X 15872 | grep -e 'Pss' -e 'output' | awk '{if(NR>1)printf("%16s %4s %6s %10s %10s %10s\n", $1, $2, $4, $5, $7, $8)}' >> Address Perm Device Inode Rss Pss >> 7fcbb9eb9000 r--s fc:10 3755268 24576 12288 >> >> The Pss of mmap'ed file by the first process has not decreased (I expected a >> value of Rss / 3 because I hoped the memory would have been shared by the 3 >> processes). If I look at the process map of the last process, we can interpret >> a new memory area was allocated and locked. >> >> % pmap -X 15892 | grep -e 'Pss' -e 'output' | awk '{if(NR>1)printf("%16s %4s %6s %10s %10s %10s\n", $1, $2, $4, $5, $7, $8)}' >> Address Perm Device Inode Rss Pss >> 7f5adc53f000 r--s fc:10 3755269 24576 24576 >> >> So my questions: >> - Why can't we benefit from the memory sharing when reflinked files are mmap'ed >> ? It would be great because one application would be, in the context of >> containers, the possibility to share some read only areas between container >> that are built from the layer diff that are reproducible between images. We >> can imagine a layer that brings some shared libraries in an image from a >> reproducible FS diff so that containers would not load several times a >> library. >> - I can think of many tricky cases with the behavior I was expecting (especially >> if a process has write access to the mapped area), but if you know a way, an >> option something to achieve what I am trying to do, I would be glad to hear >> it. >> - Conversely, don't hesitate to tell me my expectation is just crazy. >> >> Anyway, I am always looking forward to listening to valuable specialist insights. >> Thanks in advance, >> >> stac >> >> PS: Please, add me is CC if this message deserves an answer. >> > >This is one of the major features overlayfs brings to the table over >reflink's current implementation. > >With reflink copies you get distinct inodes and the data sharing >occurs further down in the fs at the extent level, below the struct >address_space instances. > >If memory serves Dave Chinner has given the issue some thought, but I >haven't noticed/heard anything in terms of progress there. Maybe >he'll see this and chime in... > >Regards, >Vito Caputo Thanks for your answer. If I understand correctly, reflink feature cannot be used in the scenario I propose because reflinks are optimization occuring under the VFS. This makes sense to me and I was not really confident this had a chance to work. As you suggest, I will turn my effort on overlay. Regards, stac