[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55E7E962.2000607@plexistor.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2015 09:32:02 +0300
From: Boaz Harrosh <boaz@...xistor.com>
To: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
x86@...nel.org, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dax, pmem: add support for msync
On 09/02/2015 10:04 PM, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 03:18:41PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
<>
>> Apps expect all these to work:
>> 1. open mmap m-write msync ... close
>> 2. open mmap m-write fsync ... close
>> 3. open mmap m-write unmap ... fsync close
>>
>> 4. open mmap m-write sync ...
>
> So basically you made close have an implicit fsync? What about the flow that
> looks like this:
>
> 5. open mmap close m-write
>
What? no, close means ummap because you need a file* attached to your vma
And you miss-understood me, the vm_opts->close is the *unmap* operation not
the file::close() operation.
I meant memory-cl_flush on unmap before the vma goes away.
> This guy definitely needs an msync/fsync at the end to make sure that the
> m-write becomes durable.
>
Exactly done at unmap time.
> Also, the CLOSE(2) man page specifically says that a flush does not occur at
> close:
> A successful close does not guarantee that the data has been
> successfully saved to disk, as the kernel defers writes. It
> is not common for a filesystem to flush the buffers when the stream is
> closed. If you need to be sure that the data is physically stored,
> use fsync(2). (It will depend on the disk hardware at this point.)
>
> I don't think that adding an implicit fsync to close is the right solution -
> we just need to get msync and fsync correctly working.
>
So above is not relevant, and we are doing that. taking care of cpu-cache flushing.
This is not disk-flushing, on a long memcpy from usermode most of the data is
already durable, is only the leftover margins. Like the dax_io in the kernel
dax implies direct_io always, all we are trying is to have the least
performance hit in memory-cache-flushing.
IS nothing to do with the text above.
>> The first 3 are supported with above, because what happens is that at [3]
>> the fsync actually happens on unmap and fsync is redundant in that case.
>>
>> The only broken scenario is [3]. We do not have a list of "dax-dirty" inodes
>> per sb to iterate on and call inode-sync on. This cause problems mostly in
>> freeze because with actual [3] scenario the file will be eventually closed
>> and persistent, but after the call to sync returns.
>>
>> Its on my TODO to fix [3] based on instructions from Dave.
>> The mmap call will put the inode on the list and the dax_vm_close will
>> remove it. One of the regular dirty list should be used as suggested by
>> Dave.
>
> I believe in the above two paragraphs you meant [4], so the
>
> 4. open mmap m-write sync ...
>
> case needs to be fixed so that we can detect DAX-dirty inodes?
>
Yes I'll be working on sync (DAX-dirty-i_list) soon but it needs a working
fsync to be in place (eg: dax_fsync(inode))
Thanks
Boaz
--
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