Hi,

A while ago there was a discussion about supporting direct-io on tmpfs.

Here is a simple patch that does it.

1. A new fs flag FS_RAM_BASED is added and the O_DIRECT flag is ignored
   if this flag is set (suggestions on a better name?)

2. Specify FS_RAM_BASED for tmpfs and ramfs.

3. When EINVAL is returned only a fput is done. I changed it to go
   through cleanup_all. But there is still a cleanup problem:

  If a new file is created and then EINVAL is returned due to O_DIRECT,
  the file is still left on the disk. I am not exactly sure how to fix
  it other than adding another fs flag so we could check O_DIRECT
  support at a much earlier stage. Comments on how to fix it?

Signed-off-by: Hua Zhong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

diff --git a/fs/open.c b/fs/open.c
index c989fb4..c03285f 100644
--- a/fs/open.c
+++ b/fs/open.c
@@ -708,11 +708,13 @@ static struct file *__dentry_open(struct
 
        /* NB: we're sure to have correct a_ops only after f_op->open */
        if (f->f_flags & O_DIRECT) {
-               if (!f->f_mapping->a_ops ||
-                   ((!f->f_mapping->a_ops->direct_IO) &&
-                   (!f->f_mapping->a_ops->get_xip_page))) {
-                       fput(f);
-                       f = ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+               if (dentry->d_sb->s_type->fs_flags & FS_RAM_BASED)
+                       f->f_flags &= ~O_DIRECT;
+               else if (!f->f_mapping->a_ops ||
+                        ((!f->f_mapping->a_ops->direct_IO) &&
+                         (!f->f_mapping->a_ops->get_xip_page))) {
+                       error = -EINVAL;
+                       goto cleanup_all;
                }
        }
 
diff --git a/fs/ramfs/inode.c b/fs/ramfs/inode.c
index 2faf4cd..0d4bebc 100644
--- a/fs/ramfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/ramfs/inode.c
@@ -199,11 +199,13 @@ static int rootfs_get_sb(struct file_sys
 
 static struct file_system_type ramfs_fs_type = {
        .name           = "ramfs",
+       .fs_flags       = FS_RAM_BASED,
        .get_sb         = ramfs_get_sb,
        .kill_sb        = kill_litter_super,
 };
 static struct file_system_type rootfs_fs_type = {
        .name           = "rootfs",
+       .fs_flags       = FS_RAM_BASED, 
        .get_sb         = rootfs_get_sb,
        .kill_sb        = kill_litter_super,
 };
diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
index 186da81..0d95988 100644
--- a/include/linux/fs.h
+++ b/include/linux/fs.h
@@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ extern int dir_notify_enable;
 /* public flags for file_system_type */
 #define FS_REQUIRES_DEV 1 
 #define FS_BINARY_MOUNTDATA 2
+#define FS_RAM_BASED   8192    /* Ignore O_DIRECT */
 #define FS_REVAL_DOT   16384   /* Check the paths ".", ".." for staleness */
 #define FS_RENAME_DOES_D_MOVE  32768   /* FS will handle d_move()
                                         * during rename() internally.
diff --git a/mm/shmem.c b/mm/shmem.c
index 70da7a0..5d23e8a 100644
--- a/mm/shmem.c
+++ b/mm/shmem.c
@@ -2413,6 +2413,7 @@ static int shmem_get_sb(struct file_syst
 static struct file_system_type tmpfs_fs_type = {
        .owner          = THIS_MODULE,
        .name           = "tmpfs",
+       .fs_flags       = FS_RAM_BASED,
        .get_sb         = shmem_get_sb,
        .kill_sb        = kill_litter_super,
 };
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to