| Message ID | 20191030041358.14450-1-ruansy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | xfs: reflink & dedupe for fsdax (read/write path). | expand |
On 12:13 30/10, Shiyang Ruan wrote: > This patchset aims to take care of this issue to make reflink and dedupe > work correctly (actually in read/write path, there still has some problems, > such as the page->mapping and page->index issue, in mmap path) in XFS under > fsdax mode. Have you managed to solve the problem of multi-mapped pages? I don't think we can include this until we solve that problem. This is the problem I faced when I was doing the btrfs dax support. Suppose there is an extent shared with multiple files. You map data for both files. Which inode should page->mapping->host (precisely page->mapping) point to? As Dave pointed out, this needs to be fixed at the mm level, and will not only benefit dax with CoW but other areas such as overlayfs and possibly containers.
On 10/30/19 7:48 PM, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: > On 12:13 30/10, Shiyang Ruan wrote: >> This patchset aims to take care of this issue to make reflink and dedupe >> work correctly (actually in read/write path, there still has some problems, >> such as the page->mapping and page->index issue, in mmap path) in XFS under >> fsdax mode. > > Have you managed to solve the problem of multi-mapped pages? I don't > think we can include this until we solve that problem. This is the > problem I faced when I was doing the btrfs dax support. That problem still exists, didn't be solved in this patchset. But I am also looking into it. As you know, it's a bit difficult. Since the iomap for cow is merged in for-next tree, I think it's time to update this in order to get some comments. > > Suppose there is an extent shared with multiple files. You map data for > both files. Which inode should page->mapping->host (precisely > page->mapping) point to? As Dave pointed out, this needs to be fixed at > the mm level, and will not only benefit dax with CoW but other > areas such as overlayfs and possibly containers. Yes, I will try to figure out a solution. >
Hi Darrick, Dave, Do you have any comment on this? On 10/30/19 12:13 PM, Shiyang Ruan wrote: > This patchset aims to take care of this issue to make reflink and dedupe > work correctly (actually in read/write path, there still has some problems, > such as the page->mapping and page->index issue, in mmap path) in XFS under > fsdax mode. > > It is based on Goldwyn's patchsets: "v4 Btrfs dax support" and the latest > iomap. I borrowed some patches related and made a few fix to make it > basically works fine. > > For dax framework: > 1. adapt to the latest change in iomap (two iomaps). > > For XFS: > 1. distinguish dax write/zero from normal write/zero. > 2. remap extents after COW. > 3. add file contents comparison function based on dax framework. > 4. use xfs_break_layouts() instead of break_layout to support dax. > > > Goldwyn Rodrigues (3): > dax: replace mmap entry in case of CoW > fs: dedup file range to use a compare function > dax: memcpy before zeroing range > > Shiyang Ruan (4): > dax: Introduce dax_copy_edges() for COW. > dax: copy data before write. > xfs: handle copy-on-write in fsdax write() path. > xfs: support dedupe for fsdax. > > fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 3 +- > fs/dax.c | 211 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > fs/iomap/buffered-io.c | 8 +- > fs/ocfs2/file.c | 2 +- > fs/read_write.c | 11 ++- > fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c | 6 +- > fs/xfs/xfs_file.c | 10 +- > fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c | 3 +- > fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c | 11 ++- > fs/xfs/xfs_reflink.c | 79 ++++++++------- > include/linux/dax.h | 16 ++-- > include/linux/fs.h | 9 +- > 12 files changed, 291 insertions(+), 78 deletions(-) >
On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:11 PM Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote: > > Hi Darrick, Dave, > > Do you have any comment on this? Christoph pointed out at ALPSS that this problem has significant overlap with the shared page-cache for reflink problem. So I think we need to solve that first and then circle back to dax reflink support. I'm starting to take a look at that.
On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 07:30:32PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: > On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:11 PM Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Darrick, Dave, > > > > Do you have any comment on this? > > Christoph pointed out at ALPSS that this problem has significant > overlap with the shared page-cache for reflink problem. So I think we > need to solve that first and then circle back to dax reflink support. > I'm starting to take a look at that. I think the DAX side is somewhat simpler because it doesn't really need to involve the page cache and we don't have to worry about subtly breaking random filesystems. Hence I'd suggest we sort out a solution for DAX first, then worry about page cache stuff. The shared page cache for reflink feature is not a show stopper - multiple references for DAX is a show stopper. Let's deal with the DAX problem first. Cheers, -Dave.