| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1208370260.3603.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:24:20 -0700
From: Mingming Cao <cmm@...ibm.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, sandeen@...hat.com
Subject: Re: Delayed allocation and page_lock vs transaction start ordering
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 12:35 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 15-04-08 16:33:17, Mingming Cao wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-04-15 at 16:28 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2008-04-15 at 11:08 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2008-04-15 at 18:14 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I've ported my patch inversing locking ordering of page_lock and
> > > > > transaction start to ext4 (on top of ext4 patch queue). Everything except
> > > > > delayed allocation is converted (the patch is below for interested
> > > > > readers). The question is how to proceed with delayed allocation. Its
> > > > > current implementation in VFS is designed to work well with the old
> > > > > ordering (page lock first, then start a transaction). We could bend it to
> > > > > work with the new locking ordering but I really see no point since ext4 is
> > > > > the only user.
> > > >
> > > > I think the plan is port the changes to ext2/3/JFS and support delayed
> > > > allocation on those filesystems.
> > > >
> > > > > Also XFS has AFAIK ordering first start transaction, then
> > > > > lock pages so if we should ever merge delayed alloc implementations the new
> > > > > ordering would make it easier.
> > > > > So what do people think here? Do you agree with reimplementing current
> > > > > mpage_da_... functions?
> > > >
> > > > It worth a try, but I could not see how to bend delayed allocation to
> > > > work the new ordering:( With delayed allocation Ext4 gets into
> > > > writepage() directly with page locked, but we need to start transaction
> > > > to do block allocation...:(
> > >
> > > Looked again it seems possible to reservse the order with delayed
> > > allocation. with ext3_da_writepgaes() we could start the journal before
> > > calling mpage_da_writepages()(which will lock the pages), instead of
> > > start the journal inside ext4_da_get_block_write(). So that we could get
> > > the locking order right. Just need to taking care of the estimated
> > > credits right.
> > >
> > > How about this? (untested, just throw out for comment)
> >
> > Seems sent out an old version, this version compiles
> Thanks for the patch. Some comments are below.
>
> > ---
> > fs/ext4/inode.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> > 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >
> > Index: linux-2.6.25-rc9/fs/ext4/inode.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.25-rc9.orig/fs/ext4/inode.c 2008-04-15 15:40:33.000000000 -0700
> > +++ linux-2.6.25-rc9/fs/ext4/inode.c 2008-04-15 16:32:10.000000000 -0700
> > @@ -1437,18 +1437,12 @@ static int ext4_da_get_block_prep(struct
> > static int ext4_da_get_block_write(struct inode *inode, sector_t iblock,
> > struct buffer_head *bh_result, int create)
> > {
> > - int ret, needed_blocks = ext4_writepage_trans_blocks(inode);
> > + int ret;
> > unsigned max_blocks = bh_result->b_size >> inode->i_blkbits;
> > loff_t disksize = EXT4_I(inode)->i_disksize;
> > handle_t *handle = NULL;
> >
> > - if (create) {
> > - handle = ext4_journal_start(inode, needed_blocks);
> > - if (IS_ERR(handle)) {
> > - ret = PTR_ERR(handle);
> > - goto out;
> > - }
> > - }
> > + handle = ext4_journal_current_handle();
> Maybe we could assert that handle != NULL? When using delayed allocation,
> a transaction should always be started.
>
Agreed.
> > ret = ext4_get_blocks_wrap(handle, inode, iblock, max_blocks,
> > bh_result, create, 0);
> > @@ -1483,17 +1477,51 @@ static int ext4_da_get_block_write(struc
> > ret = 0;
> > }
> >
> > -out:
> > - if (handle && !IS_ERR(handle))
> > - ext4_journal_stop(handle);
> > -
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > +/*
> > + * For now just follow the DIO way to estimate the max credits
> > + * needed to write out EXT4_MAX_BUF_BLOCKS pages.
> > + * todo: need to calculate the max credits need for
> > + * extent based files, currently the DIO credits is based on
> > + * indirect-blocks mapping way.
> > + *
> > + * Probably should have a generic way to calculate credits
> > + * for DIO, writepages, and truncate
> > + */
> > +#define EXT4_MAX_BUF_BLOCKS DIO_MAX_BLOCKS
> > +#define EXT4_MAX_BUF_CREDITS DIO_CREDITS
> > +
> > static int ext4_da_writepages(struct address_space *mapping,
> > struct writeback_control *wbc)
> > {
> > - return mpage_da_writepages(mapping, wbc, ext4_da_get_block_write);
> > + struct inode *inode = mapping->host;
> > + handle_t *handle = NULL;
> > + int needed_blocks;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Estimate the worse case needed credits to write out
> > + * EXT4_MAX_BUF_BLOCKS pages
> > + */
> > + needed_blocks = EXT4_MAX_BUF_CREDITS;
> > +
> > + /* start the transaction with credits*/
> > + handle = ext4_journal_start(inode, needed_blocks);
> > + if (IS_ERR(handle)) {
> > + ret = PTR_ERR(handle);
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* set the max pages could be write-out at a time */
> > + wbc->range_end = wbc->range_start +
> > + EXT4_MAX_BUF_BLOCKS << PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - 1;
> I think limiting mpage_da_writepages through nr_to_write is better than
> through range_end. That way you don't count clean pages...
>
You are right.
> > +
> > + ret = mpage_da_writepages(mapping, wbc, ext4_da_get_block_write);
> > + ext4_journal_stop(handle);
> But here we can't just stop. We have to write everything original caller
> has asked about (at least in WB_SYNC_ALL mode). But the question is where
> to resume because scanning the whole range again is kind-of excessive and
> prone do livelock with other process dirtying the file via mmap. Maybe if
> we slightly modified write_cache_pages() to always store in writeback_index
> where they finished, we could use this value.
Thanks for pointing this out.
How about this?
---
fs/ext4/inode.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
mm/page-writeback.c | 2 -
2 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.25-rc9/fs/ext4/inode.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.25-rc9.orig/fs/ext4/inode.c 2008-04-16 09:59:00.000000000 -0700
+++ linux-2.6.25-rc9/fs/ext4/inode.c 2008-04-16 11:23:12.000000000 -0700
@@ -1437,18 +1437,13 @@ static int ext4_da_get_block_prep(struct
static int ext4_da_get_block_write(struct inode *inode, sector_t iblock,
struct buffer_head *bh_result, int create)
{
- int ret, needed_blocks = ext4_writepage_trans_blocks(inode);
+ int ret;
unsigned max_blocks = bh_result->b_size >> inode->i_blkbits;
loff_t disksize = EXT4_I(inode)->i_disksize;
handle_t *handle = NULL;
- if (create) {
- handle = ext4_journal_start(inode, needed_blocks);
- if (IS_ERR(handle)) {
- ret = PTR_ERR(handle);
- goto out;
- }
- }
+ J_ASSERT(handle != NULL || create == 0);
+ handle = ext4_journal_current_handle();
ret = ext4_get_blocks_wrap(handle, inode, iblock, max_blocks,
bh_result, create, 0);
@@ -1483,17 +1478,66 @@ static int ext4_da_get_block_write(struc
ret = 0;
}
-out:
- if (handle && !IS_ERR(handle))
- ext4_journal_stop(handle);
-
return ret;
}
+/*
+ * For now just follow the DIO way to estimate the max credits
+ * needed to write out EXT4_MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES.
+ * todo: need to calculate the max credits need for
+ * extent based files, currently the DIO credits is based on
+ * indirect-blocks mapping way.
+ *
+ * Probably should have a generic way to calculate credits
+ * for DIO, writepages, and truncate
+ */
+#define EXT4_MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES DIO_MAX_BLOCKS
+#define EXT4_MAX_WRITEBACK_CREDITS DIO_CREDITS
+
static int ext4_da_writepages(struct address_space *mapping,
struct writeback_control *wbc)
{
- return mpage_da_writepages(mapping, wbc, ext4_da_get_block_write);
+ struct inode *inode = mapping->host;
+ handle_t *handle = NULL;
+ int needed_blocks;
+ int ret = 0;
+ unsigned range_cyclic;
+ long to_write;
+
+ /*
+ * Estimate the worse case needed credits to write out
+ * EXT4_MAX_BUF_BLOCKS pages
+ */
+ needed_blocks = EXT4_MAX_WRITEBACK_CREDITS;
+
+ to_write = wbc->nr_to_write;
+ range_cyclic = wbc->range_cyclic;
+ wbc->range_cyclic = 1;
+
+ while (!ret && to_write) {
+ /* start a new transaction*/
+ handle = ext4_journal_start(inode, needed_blocks);
+ if (IS_ERR(handle)) {
+ ret = PTR_ERR(handle);
+ goto out_writepages;
+ }
+ /*
+ * set the max dirty pages could be write at a time
+ * to fit into the reserved transaction credits
+ */
+ if (wbc->nr_to_write > EXT4_MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES)
+ wbc->nr_to_write = EXT4_MAX_WRITEBACK_PAGES;
+ to_write -= wbc->nr_to_write;
+
+ ret = mpage_da_writepages(mapping, wbc, ext4_da_get_block_write);
+ ext4_journal_stop(handle);
+ to_write +=wbc->nr_to_write;
+ }
+
+out_writepages:
+ wbc->nr_to_write = to_write;
+ wbc->range_cyclic = range_cyclic;
+ return ret;
}
static int ext4_da_write_begin(struct file *file, struct address_space *mapping,
Index: linux-2.6.25-rc9/mm/page-writeback.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.25-rc9.orig/mm/page-writeback.c 2008-04-16 11:00:20.000000000 -0700
+++ linux-2.6.25-rc9/mm/page-writeback.c 2008-04-16 11:07:59.000000000 -0700
@@ -816,7 +816,7 @@ int write_cache_pages(struct address_spa
pagevec_init(&pvec, 0);
if (wbc->range_cyclic) {
index = mapping->writeback_index; /* Start from prev offset */
- end = -1;
+ end = wbc->range_end >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
} else {
index = wbc->range_start >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
end = wbc->range_end >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists