On 09/04/2015 05:08 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 04:17:02PM -0400, Anna Schumaker wrote:
>> The NFS server will need a fallback for filesystems that don't have any
>> kind of copy acceleration yet, and it should be generally useful to have
>> an in-kernel copy to avoid lots of switches between kernel and
>> user space. Users who only want a reflink can pass the COPY_REFLINK
>> flag to disable the fallback.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Anna Schumaker <anna.schuma...@netapp.com>
>> ---
>> fs/read_write.c | 16 ++++++++++++----
>> include/linux/copy.h | 6 ++++++
>> include/uapi/linux/Kbuild | 1 +
>> include/uapi/linux/copy.h | 6 ++++++
>> 4 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 include/linux/copy.h
>> create mode 100644 include/uapi/linux/copy.h
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/read_write.c b/fs/read_write.c
>> index 9dafb7f..bd7e7e2 100644
>> --- a/fs/read_write.c
>> +++ b/fs/read_write.c
>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
>> #include <linux/slab.h>
>> #include <linux/stat.h>
>> #include <linux/fcntl.h>
>> +#include <linux/copy.h>
>> #include <linux/file.h>
>> #include <linux/uio.h>
>> #include <linux/fsnotify.h>
>> @@ -1342,7 +1343,7 @@ ssize_t vfs_copy_file_range(struct file *file_in,
>> loff_t pos_in,
>> struct inode *inode_out;
>> ssize_t ret;
>>
>> - if (flags)
>> + if (!((flags == 0) || (flags == COPY_REFLINK)))
>
> I think it's a good idea for the copy_file_range flags to have the name of
> the syscall in them at the beginning, both to try to avoid namespace
> collisions
> and also to make it clear where the flag comes from. So, could we prefix the
> values with "COPY_FILE_RANGE_" instead of just "COPY_"?
Sure, that makes sense!
>
> Also... I'm confused by what the structure of check implies about 'flags' --
> are each of 'flags's values supposed to be mutually exclusive, or is it a
> straight bitset like flags arguments tend to be?
I was expecting this to be a bitset, but that's not the easiest to communicate
when there is (currently) only one flag. I'll take a look at other functions
to see how I should be validating this!
Thanks for the comments,
Anna
>
> Say we want to add dedupe and ponies as potential behavioral variants. Then
> we'd end up with something like:
>
> /* raw flags */
> #define COPY_FILE_RANGE_SHARE_BLOCKS (1)
> #define COPY_FILE_RANGE_CHECK_SAME (2)
> #define COPY_FILE_RANGE_PONIES (4)
>
> /* syntactic sugar */
> #define COPY_FILE_RANGE_DEDUPE (COPY_FILE_RANGE_SHARE_BLOCKS |
> \
> COPY_FILE_RANGE_CHECK_SAME)
> #define COPY_FILE_RANGE_ALL (COPY_FILE_RANGE_SHARE_BLOCKS | \
> COPY_FILE_RANGE_CHECK_SAME | \
> COPY_FILE_RANGE_PONIES)
>
> and in copy_file_range():
>
> if (flags & ~COPY_FILE_RANGE_ALL)
> return -EINVAL;
> if ((flags & COPY_FILE_RANGE_CHECK_SAME) &&
> !(flags & COPY_FILE_RANGE_SHARE_BLOCKS))
> return -EINVAL; /* or is it return 0? */
>
> if (flags & COPY_FILE_RANGE_PONIES)
> panic();
> if (flags & COPY_FILE_RANGE_CHECK_SAME)
> check_same_contents(...);
> err = vfs_copy_range(...);
> if (err < 0 && !(flags & COPY_FILE_RANGE_SHARE_BLOCKS))
> err = splice(...);
>
> One hard part is figuring out just what actions we want userland to be able to
> ask for. I can think of three: "share blocks via remapping" (i.e. reflink),
> "share blocks via remapping but only if they're identical" (i.e. dedupe), and
> "classic copy via pagecache". I lean towards giving each variant its own bit
> and only allowing through the cases that make sense, rather than giving each
> valid combination its own unique number, but maybe I misinterpreted the intent
> behind the code.
>
> (I guess there could also be 'do it with hardware assist' but that's digging
> myself a pretty deep hole.)
>
> --D
>
>> return -EINVAL;
>>
>> /* copy_file_range allows full ssize_t len, ignoring MAX_RW_COUNT */
>> @@ -1355,7 +1356,7 @@ ssize_t vfs_copy_file_range(struct file *file_in,
>> loff_t pos_in,
>> if (!(file_in->f_mode & FMODE_READ) ||
>> !(file_out->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE) ||
>> (file_out->f_flags & O_APPEND) ||
>> - !file_out->f_op || !file_out->f_op->copy_file_range)
>> + !file_in->f_op)
>> return -EBADF;
>>
>> inode_in = file_inode(file_in);
>> @@ -1377,8 +1378,15 @@ ssize_t vfs_copy_file_range(struct file *file_in,
>> loff_t pos_in,
>> if (ret)
>> return ret;
>>
>> - ret = file_out->f_op->copy_file_range(file_in, pos_in, file_out,
>> pos_out,
>> - len, flags);
>> + ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> + if (file_out->f_op->copy_file_range)
>> + ret = file_out->f_op->copy_file_range(file_in, pos_in, file_out,
>> + pos_out, len, flags);
>> + if ((ret < 0) && !(flags & COPY_REFLINK)) {
>> + file_start_write(file_out);
>> + ret = do_splice_direct(file_in, &pos_in, file_out, &pos_out,
>> len, 0);
>> + file_end_write(file_out);
>> + }
>> if (ret > 0) {
>> fsnotify_access(file_in);
>> add_rchar(current, ret);
>> diff --git a/include/linux/copy.h b/include/linux/copy.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..fd54543
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/include/linux/copy.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
>> +#ifndef _LINUX_COPY_H
>> +#define _LINUX_COPY_H
>> +
>> +#include <uapi/linux/copy.h>
>> +
>> +#endif /* _LINUX_COPY_H */
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/Kbuild b/include/uapi/linux/Kbuild
>> index 1ff9942..b6109f3 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/Kbuild
>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/Kbuild
>> @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ header-y += coda_psdev.h
>> header-y += coff.h
>> header-y += connector.h
>> header-y += const.h
>> +header-y += copy.h
>> header-y += cramfs_fs.h
>> header-y += cuda.h
>> header-y += cyclades.h
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/copy.h b/include/uapi/linux/copy.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..68f3d65
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/copy.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
>> +#ifndef _UAPI_LINUX_COPY_H
>> +#define _UAPI_LINUX_COPY_H
>> +
>> +#define COPY_REFLINK 1 /* only perform a reflink */
>> +
>> +#endif /* _UAPI_LINUX_COPY_H */
>> --
>> 2.5.1
>>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
