[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200428111636.GK29705@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 04:16:36 -0700
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Ruan Shiyang <ruansy.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"darrick.wong@...cle.com" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
"dan.j.williams@...el.com" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"hch@....de" <hch@....de>, "rgoldwyn@...e.de" <rgoldwyn@...e.de>,
"Qi, Fuli" <qi.fuli@...itsu.com>,
"Gotou, Yasunori" <y-goto@...itsu.com>
Subject: Re: 回复: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]
dax: Add a dax-rmap tree to support reflink
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 05:32:41PM +0800, Ruan Shiyang wrote:
> On 2020/4/28 下午2:43, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 06:09:47AM +0000, Ruan, Shiyang wrote:
> > > 在 2020/4/27 20:28:36, "Matthew Wilcox" <willy@...radead.org> 写道:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 04:47:42PM +0800, Shiyang Ruan wrote:
> > > > > This patchset is a try to resolve the shared 'page cache' problem for
> > > > > fsdax.
> > > > >
> > > > > In order to track multiple mappings and indexes on one page, I
> > > > > introduced a dax-rmap rb-tree to manage the relationship. A dax entry
> > > > > will be associated more than once if is shared. At the second time we
> > > > > associate this entry, we create this rb-tree and store its root in
> > > > > page->private(not used in fsdax). Insert (->mapping, ->index) when
> > > > > dax_associate_entry() and delete it when dax_disassociate_entry().
> > > >
> > > > Do we really want to track all of this on a per-page basis? I would
> > > > have thought a per-extent basis was more useful. Essentially, create
> > > > a new address_space for each shared extent. Per page just seems like
> > > > a huge overhead.
> > > >
> > > Per-extent tracking is a nice idea for me. I haven't thought of it
> > > yet...
> > >
> > > But the extent info is maintained by filesystem. I think we need a way
> > > to obtain this info from FS when associating a page. May be a bit
> > > complicated. Let me think about it...
> >
> > That's why I want the -user of this association- to do a filesystem
> > callout instead of keeping it's own naive tracking infrastructure.
> > The filesystem can do an efficient, on-demand reverse mapping lookup
> > from it's own extent tracking infrastructure, and there's zero
> > runtime overhead when there are no errors present.
> >
> > At the moment, this "dax association" is used to "report" a storage
> > media error directly to userspace. I say "report" because what it
> > does is kill userspace processes dead. The storage media error
> > actually needs to be reported to the owner of the storage media,
> > which in the case of FS-DAX is the filesytem.
>
> Understood.
>
> BTW, this is the usage in memory-failure, so what about rmap? I have not
> found how to use this tracking in rmap. Do you have any ideas?
>
> >
> > That way the filesystem can then look up all the owners of that bad
> > media range (i.e. the filesystem block it corresponds to) and take
> > appropriate action. e.g.
>
> I tried writing a function to look up all the owners' info of one block in
> xfs for memory-failure use. It was dropped in this patchset because I found
> out that this lookup function needs 'rmapbt' to be enabled when mkfs. But
> by default, rmapbt is disabled. I am not sure if it matters...
I'm pretty sure you can't have shared extents on an XFS filesystem if you
_don't_ have the rmapbt feature enabled. I mean, that's why it exists.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists