On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 09:46:07PM +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 4:46 AM Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This series creates a new log incompat feature and log intent items to > > track high level progress of swapping ranges of two files and finish > > interrupted work if the system goes down. It then adds a new > > FISWAPRANGE ioctl so that userspace can access the atomic extent > > swapping feature. With this feature, user programs will be able to > > update files atomically by opening an O_TMPFILE, reflinking the source > > file to it, making whatever updates they want to make, and then > > atomically swap the changed bits back to the source file. It even has > > an optional ability to detect a changed source file and reject the > > update. > > > > The intent behind this new userspace functionality is to enable atomic > > rewrites of arbitrary parts of individual files. For years, application > > programmers wanting to ensure the atomicity of a file update had to > > write the changes to a new file in the same directory, fsync the new > > file, rename the new file on top of the old filename, and then fsync the > > directory. People get it wrong all the time, and $fs hacks abound. > > > > With atomic file updates, this is no longer necessary. Programmers > > create an O_TMPFILE, optionally FICLONE the file contents into the > > temporary file, make whatever changes they want to the tempfile, and > > FISWAPRANGE the contents from the tempfile into the regular file. > > That also requires the *readers* to be atomic though, right? Since now > the updates are visible to readers instantly, instead of only on the > next open()? If you used this to update /etc/passwd while someone else > is in the middle of reading it with a sequence of read() calls, there > would be fireworks... Right. In XFS, we guarantee read atomicity by by grabbing i_rwsem and the xfs mmap lock, break any layout leases, drain the directios, and then flush+invalidate the page cache. Once that preparation step is done, we do the actual extent swap. > I guess maybe the new API could also be wired up to ext4's > EXT4_IOC_MOVE_EXT somehow, provided that the caller specifies > FILE_SWAP_RANGE_NONATOMIC? Sort of. ext4's MOVE_EXT also swaps the file contents doing the swap one buffer_head at a time, so you'd have to turn that off since this API assumes that the caller already set each file's contents beforehand. Ted has theorized that so long as the extent map size is less than 1/4 of the journal then it would be possible to do atomic swaps in ext4 without adding all the logical log item bits that were a prerequisite for the xfs implementation. --D
