On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 06:24:54AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 04:41:33 +0000 > "Dilger, Andreas" <andreas.dil...@intel.com> wrote: > > > On 2015/09/11, 4:20 AM, "HPDD-discuss on behalf of Jeff Layton" > > <hpdd-discuss-boun...@lists.01.org on behalf of jlay...@poochiereds.net> > > wrote: > > > > >With NFSv3 nfsd will always attempt to send along WCC data to the > > >client. This generally involves saving off the in-core inode information > > >prior to doing the operation on the given filehandle, and then issuing a > > >vfs_getattr to it after the op. > > > > > >Some filesystems (particularly clustered or networked ones) have an > > >expensive ->getattr inode operation. Atomicitiy is also often difficult > > >or impossible to guarantee on such filesystems. For those, we're best > > >off not trying to provide WCC information to the client at all, and to > > >simply allow it to poll for that information as needed with a GETATTR > > >RPC. > > > > > >This patch adds a new flags field to struct export_operations, and > > >defines a new EXPORT_OP_NOWCC flag that filesystems can use to indicate > > >that nfsd should not attempt to provide WCC info in NFSv3 replies. It > > >also adds a blurb about the new flags field and flag to the exporting > > >documentation. > > > > > >The server will also now skip collecting this information for NFSv2 as > > >well, since that info is never used there anyway. > > > > > >Note that this patch does not add this flag to any filesystem > > >export_operations structures. This was originally developed to allow > > >reexporting nfs via nfsd. That code is not (and may never be) suitable > > >for merging into mainline. > > > > > >Other filesystems may want to consider enabling this flag too. It's hard > > >to tell however which ones have export operations to enable export via > > >knfsd and which ones mostly rely on them for open-by-filehandle support, > > >so I'm leaving that up to the individual maintainers to decide. I am > > >cc'ing the relevant lists for those filesystems that I think may want to > > >consider adding this though. > > > > > >Cc: hpdd-disc...@lists.01.org > > >Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org > > >Cc: cluster-de...@redhat.com > > >Cc: fuse-de...@lists.sourceforge.net > > >Cc: ocfs2-de...@oss.oracle.com > > >Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.lay...@primarydata.com> > > >--- > > > Documentation/filesystems/nfs/Exporting | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > fs/nfsd/nfs3xdr.c | 5 ++++- > > > fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ > > > fs/nfsd/nfsfh.h | 5 ++++- > > > include/linux/exportfs.h | 2 ++ > > > 5 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > >diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/nfs/Exporting > > >b/Documentation/filesystems/nfs/Exporting > > >index 520a4becb75c..fa636cde3907 100644 > > >--- a/Documentation/filesystems/nfs/Exporting > > >+++ b/Documentation/filesystems/nfs/Exporting > > >@@ -138,6 +138,11 @@ struct which has the following members: > > > to find potential names, and matches inode numbers to find the > > >correct > > > match. > > > > > >+ flags > > >+ Some filesystems may need to be handled differently than others. The > > >+ export_operations struct also includes a flags field that allows the > > >+ filesystem to communicate such information to nfsd. See the Export > > >+ Operations Flags section below for more explanation. > > > > > > A filehandle fragment consists of an array of 1 or more 4byte words, > > > together with a one byte "type". > > >@@ -147,3 +152,25 @@ generated by encode_fh, in which case it will have > > >been padded with > > > nuls. Rather, the encode_fh routine should choose a "type" which > > > indicates the decode_fh how much of the filehandle is valid, and how > > > it should be interpreted. > > >+ > > >+Export Operations Flags > > >+----------------------- > > >+In addition to the operation vector pointers, struct export_operations > > >also > > >+contains a "flags" field that allows the filesystem to communicate to > > >nfsd > > >+that it may want to do things differently when dealing with it. The > > >+following flags are defined: > > >+ > > >+ EXPORT_OP_NOWCC > > >+ RFC 1813 recommends that servers always send weak cache consistency > > >+ (WCC) data to the client after each operation. The server should > > >+ atomically collect attributes about the inode, do an operation on it, > > >+ and then collect the attributes afterward. This allows the client to > > >+ skip issuing GETATTRs in some situations but means that the server > > >+ is calling vfs_getattr for almost all RPCs. On some filesystems > > >+ (particularly those that are clustered or networked) this is > > >expensive > > >+ and atomicity is difficult to guarantee. This flag indicates to nfsd > > >+ that it should skip providing WCC attributes to the client in NFSv3 > > >+ replies when doing operations on this filesystem. Consider enabling > > >+ this on filesystems that have an expensive ->getattr inode operation, > > >+ or when atomicity between pre and post operation attribute collection > > >+ is impossible to guarantee. > > >diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs3xdr.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs3xdr.c > > >index 01dcd494f781..c30c8c604e2a 100644 > > >--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs3xdr.c > > >+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs3xdr.c > > >@@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ static __be32 * > > > encode_post_op_attr(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, __be32 *p, struct svc_fh > > >*fhp) > > > { > > > struct dentry *dentry = fhp->fh_dentry; > > >- if (dentry && d_really_is_positive(dentry)) { > > >+ if (!fhp->fh_no_wcc && dentry && d_really_is_positive(dentry)) { > > > __be32 err; > > > struct kstat stat; > > > > > >@@ -256,6 +256,9 @@ void fill_post_wcc(struct svc_fh *fhp) > > > { > > > __be32 err; > > > > > >+ if (fhp->fh_no_wcc) > > >+ return; > > >+ > > > if (fhp->fh_post_saved) > > > printk("nfsd: inode locked twice during operation.\n"); > > > > > >diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c b/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c > > >index 350041a40fe5..29ae37f62b9b 100644 > > >--- a/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c > > >+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c > > >@@ -267,6 +267,16 @@ static __be32 nfsd_set_fh_dentry(struct svc_rqst > > >*rqstp, struct svc_fh *fhp) > > > > > > fhp->fh_dentry = dentry; > > > fhp->fh_export = exp; > > >+ > > >+ switch (rqstp->rq_vers) { > > >+ case 3: > > >+ if (!(dentry->d_sb->s_export_op->flags & EXPORT_OP_NOWCC)) > > >+ break; > > >+ /* Fallthrough */ > > >+ case 2: > > >+ fhp->fh_no_wcc = true; > > >+ } > > >+ > > > return 0; > > > out: > > > exp_put(exp); > > >@@ -535,6 +545,9 @@ fh_compose(struct svc_fh *fhp, struct svc_export > > >*exp, struct dentry *dentry, > > > */ > > > set_version_and_fsid_type(fhp, exp, ref_fh); > > > > > >+ /* If we have a ref_fh, then copy the fh_no_wcc setting from it. */ > > >+ fhp->fh_no_wcc = ref_fh ? ref_fh->fh_no_wcc : false; > > >+ > > > if (ref_fh == fhp) > > > fh_put(ref_fh); > > > > > >@@ -641,6 +654,7 @@ fh_put(struct svc_fh *fhp) > > > exp_put(exp); > > > fhp->fh_export = NULL; > > > } > > >+ fhp->fh_no_wcc = false; > > > return; > > > } > > > > > >diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.h b/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.h > > >index 1e90dad4926b..9ddead4d98f8 100644 > > >--- a/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.h > > >+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.h > > >@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ typedef struct svc_fh { > > > > > > unsigned char fh_locked; /* inode locked by us */ > > > unsigned char fh_want_write; /* remount protection taken */ > > >+ bool fh_no_wcc; /* no wcc data needed */ > > > > This increases the size of svc_fh because it splits the four unsigned > > chars. > > You could change all of these (fh_locked, fh_want_write, > > fh_{pre,post}saved) > > to be bools to avoid that and make it more clear they are only used as > > booleans (I verified that they all are only assigned 0 or 1). > > > > I don't think it matters, at least not on x86_64. bools and chars both > require a byte. pahole does show this adding a new hole, but that's > just because this brings the code up to 5 flags and the next field > (fh_pre_size) needs to be aligned. > > I do agree that replacing those other unsigned chars with bools is more > clear however. Maybe we should even replace them all with a single > unsigned int and use bitops to set flags in there. That would be more > space efficient now that we're at 5 flags.
Makes sense to me.--b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html