| 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: <003e01d03150$dc823590$9586a0b0$@samsung.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 14:54:15 +0900
From: Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@...sung.com>
To: 'Dmitry Monakhov' <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>,
'Dave Chinner' <david@...morbit.com>,
'Theodore Ts'o' <tytso@....edu>,
'Alexander Viro' <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: 'Brian Foster' <bfoster@...hat.com>,
'Lukáš Czerner' <lczerner@...hat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
'Ashish Sangwan' <a.sangwan@...sung.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH] fs: file freeze support
> > For implementation purpose, initially we tried to keep percpu usage counters
> > inside struct inode just like there is struct sb_writers in super_block.
> > But considering that it will significantly bloat up struct inode when actually
> > the usage of file write freeze will be infrequent, we dropped this idea.
> > Instead we have tried to use already present filesystem freezing infrastructure.
> > Current approach makes it possible for implementing file write freeze without
> > bloating any of struct super_block/inode.
> > In FS_IOC_FWFREEZE, we wait for complete fs to be frozen, set I_WRITE_FREEZED to
> > inode's state and unfreeze the fs.
> Looks interesting. I have added some comments below.
Hi Dmitry,
First, Thanks for your opinion.
> >
> > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ static int f2fs_vm_page_mkwrite(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> >
> > f2fs_balance_fs(sbi);
> >
> > + inode_start_write(inode);
> > sb_start_pagefault(inode->i_sb);
> IMHO it is reasonable to fold sb_start_{write,pagefault}, to inode_start_{write,pagefault}
Agree.
> >
> > +void inode_start_write(struct inode *inode)
> > +{
> > + struct super_block *sb = inode->i_sb;
> > +
> > +retry:
> > + spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
> This means that i_lock will be acquired on each mkpage_write for all
> users who do not care about fsfreeze which result smp performance drawback
> It is reasonable to add lockless test first because flag is set while
> whole fs is frozen so we can not enter this routine.
Right, I will remove it.
>
> > + if (inode->i_state & I_WRITE_FREEZED) {
> > + DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
> > +
> > + prepare_to_wait(&sb->s_writers.wait_unfrozen, &wait,
> > + TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> > + spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> > + schedule();
> > + finish_wait(&sb->s_writers.wait_unfrozen, &wait);
> > + goto retry;
> > + }
> > + spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> > +}
> > diff --git a/fs/ioctl.c b/fs/ioctl.c
> > index 214c3c1..c8e9ae3 100644
> > --- a/fs/ioctl.c
> > +++ b/fs/ioctl.c
> > @@ -540,6 +540,28 @@ static int ioctl_fsthaw(struct file *filp)
> > return thaw_super(sb);
> > }
> >
> > +static int ioctl_filefreeze(struct file *filp)
> > +{
> > + struct inode *inode = file_inode(filp);
> > +
> > + if (!inode_owner_or_capable(inode))
> > + return -EPERM;
> > +
> > + /* Freeze */
> > + return file_write_freeze(inode);
> > +}
>
> > +
> > +static int ioctl_filethaw(struct file *filp)
> > +{
> > + struct inode *inode = file_inode(filp);
> > +
> > + if (!inode_owner_or_capable(inode))
> > + return -EPERM;
> > +
> > + /* Thaw */
> > + return file_write_unfreeze(inode);
> > +}
> > +
> > /*
> > * When you add any new common ioctls to the switches above and below
> > * please update compat_sys_ioctl() too.
> > @@ -589,6 +611,14 @@ int do_vfs_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int fd, unsigned int cmd,
> > error = ioctl_fsthaw(filp);
> > break;
> >
> > + case FS_IOC_FWFREEZE:
> > + error = ioctl_filefreeze(filp);
> > + break;
> > +
> > + case FS_IOC_FWTHAW:
> > + error = ioctl_filethaw(filp);
> > + break;
> > +
> > case FS_IOC_FIEMAP:
> > return ioctl_fiemap(filp, arg);
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/nilfs2/file.c b/fs/nilfs2/file.c
> > index 3a03e0a..5110d9d 100644
> > --- a/fs/nilfs2/file.c
> > +++ b/fs/nilfs2/file.c
> > @@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ static int nilfs_page_mkwrite(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct vm_fault *vmf)
> > if (unlikely(nilfs_near_disk_full(inode->i_sb->s_fs_info)))
> > return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS; /* -ENOSPC */
> >
> > + inode_start_write(file_inode(vma->vm_file));
> > sb_start_pagefault(inode->i_sb);
> > lock_page(page);
> > if (page->mapping != inode->i_mapping ||
> > diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/mmap.c b/fs/ocfs2/mmap.c
> > index 10d66c7..d073fc2 100644
> > --- a/fs/ocfs2/mmap.c
> > +++ b/fs/ocfs2/mmap.c
> > @@ -136,6 +136,7 @@ static int ocfs2_page_mkwrite(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct vm_fault *vmf)
> > sigset_t oldset;
> > int ret;
> >
> > + inode_start_write(inode);
> > sb_start_pagefault(inode->i_sb);
> > ocfs2_block_signals(&oldset);
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c
> > index eae088f..5e44e42 100644
> > --- a/fs/super.c
> > +++ b/fs/super.c
> > @@ -1393,3 +1393,54 @@ out:
> > return 0;
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(thaw_super);
> > +
> IMHO it is reasonable to open code this procedure so user is responsible
> for calling freeze_super(), thaw_super() . This allow to call for
> several inodes in a row like follows:
>
> ioctl(sb,FIFREEZE)
> while (f = pop(files_list))
> ioctl(f,FS_IOC_FWFREEZE)
> ioctl(sb,FITHAW)
>
> This required for directory defragmentation(small files compacting)
Good point, I will check your point on V2.
Thanks!
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists