[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZJULQjTpcRdEUHY8@dread.disaster.area>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2023 13:02:26 +1000
From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc: Jeremy Bongio <bongiojp@...il.com>,
"Darrick J . Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
Allison Henderson <allison.henderson@...cle.com>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] iomap regression for aio dio 4k writes
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 10:32:33PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 09:59:29AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > Ah, you are testing pure overwrites, which means for ext4 the only
> > thing it needs to care about is cached mappings. What happens when
> > you add O_DSYNC here?
>
> I think you mean O_SYNC, right?
No, I *explicitly* meant O_DSYNC.
> In a pure overwrite case, where all
> of the extents are initialized and where the Oracle or DB2 server is
> doing writes to preallocated, pre-initialized space in the tablespace
> file followed by fdatasync(), there *are* no post-I/O data integrity
> operations which are required.
Wrong: O_DSYNC DIO write IO requires the data to be on stable
storage at IO completion. This means the pure overwrite IO must be
either issued as a REQ_FUA write or as a normal write followed by a
device cache flush.
That device cache flush is a post-I/O data integrity operation and
that is handled by iomap_dio_complete() -> generic_write_sync() ->
vfs_fsync_range()....
> If the file is opened O_SYNC or if the blocks were not
> preallocated using fallocate(2) and not initialized ahead of time,
> then sure, we can't use this optimization.
Well, yes. That's the whole point of the IOMAP_F_DIRTY flag - if
that is set, we don't attempt any pure overwrite optimisations
because it's not a pure overwrite and metadata needs flushing to the
journal. Hence we need to call generic_write_sync().
> What we might to do is to let the file system tell the iomap layer
> via a flag whether or not there are no post-I/O metadata
> operations required, and then *if* that flag is set, and *if* the
> inode has no pages in the page cache (so there are no invalidate
> operations necessary), it should be safe to skip using
> queue_work(). That way, the file system has to affirmatively
> state that it is safe to skip the workqueue, so it shouldn't do
> any harm to other file systems using the iomap DIO layer.
>
> What am I missing?
You didn't read my followup email. IOMAP_F_DIRTY is the flag
you describe, and it already exists.
-Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists