linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v13 0/7] fsdax: introduce fs query to support reflink

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAPcyv4jj_Z+P4BuC6EXXrzbVr1uHomQVu1A+cq55EFnSGmP7cQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 22 Apr 2022 14:27:32 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@...itsu.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux NVDIMM <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
        Jane Chu <jane.chu@...cle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 0/7] fsdax: introduce fs query to support reflink

On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 12:47 AM Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 10:54:59PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 02:35:02PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > Sure, I'm not a maintainer and just the stand-in patch shepherd for
> > > a single release. However, being unable to cleanly merge code we
> > > need integrated into our local subsystem tree for integration
> > > testing because a patch dependency with another subsystem won't gain
> > > a stable commit ID until the next merge window is .... distinctly
> > > suboptimal.
> >
> > Yes.  Which is why we've taken a lot of mm patchs through other trees,
> > sometimes specilly crafted for that.  So I guess in this case we'll
> > just need to take non-trivial dependencies into the XFS tree, and just
> > deal with small merge conflicts for the trivial ones.
>
> OK. As Naoyo has pointed out, the first dependency/conflict Ruan has
> listed looks trivial to resolve.
>
> The second dependency, OTOH, is on a new function added in the patch
> pointed to. That said, at first glance it looks to be independent of
> the first two patches in that series so I might just be able to pull
> that one patch in and have that leave us with a working
> fsdax+reflink tree.
>
> Regardless, I'll wait to see how much work the updated XFS/DAX
> reflink enablement patchset still requires when Ruan posts it before
> deciding what to do here.  If it isn't going to be a merge
> candidate, what to do with this patchset is moot because there's
> little to test without reflink enabled...

I do have a use case for this work absent the reflink work. Recall we
had a conversation about how to communicate "dax-device has been
ripped away from the fs" events and we ended up on the idea of reusing
->notify_failure(), but with the device's entire logical address range
as the notification span. That will let me unwind and delete the
PTE_DEVMAP infrastructure for taking extra device references to hold
off device-removal. Instead ->notify_failure() arranges for all active
DAX mappings to be invalidated and allow the removal to proceed
especially since physical removal does not care about software pins.