On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 12:24 PM Olga Kornievskaia <olga.kornievskaia@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 11:55 AM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 6:30 PM Olga Kornievskaia > > <olga.kornievskaia@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > From: Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Allow copy_file_range to copy between different superblocks but only > > > of the same file system types. This feature was of interest to CIFS > > > as well as NFS. > > > > > > This feature is needed by NFSv4.2 to perform file copy operation on > > > the same server or file copy between different NFSv4.2 servers. > > > > > > If a file system's fileoperations copy_file_range operation prohibits > > > cross-device copies, fall back to do_splice_direct. This would be > > > needed for the NFS (destination) server side implementation of the > > > file copy and currently for CIFS. > > > > > > Besides NFS, there is only 1 implementor of the copy_file_range FS > > > operation -- CIFS. CIFS assumes incoming file descriptors are both > > > CIFS but it will check if they are coming from different servers and > > > return error code to fall back to do_splice_direct. > > > > > > NFS will allow for copies between different NFS servers. > > > > > > Adding to the vfs.txt documentation to explicitly warn about allowing > > > for different superblocks of the same file type to be passed into the > > > copy_file_range for the future users of copy_file_range method. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt | 4 +++- > > > fs/read_write.c | 13 ++++++------- > > > 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt b/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt > > > index a6c6a8a..5e520de 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt > > > +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt > > > @@ -958,7 +958,9 @@ otherwise noted. > > > > > > fallocate: called by the VFS to preallocate blocks or punch a hole. > > > > > > - copy_file_range: called by the copy_file_range(2) system call. > > > + copy_file_range: called by copy_file_range(2) system call. This method > > > + works on two file descriptors that might reside on > > > + different superblocks of the same type of file system. > > > > > > clone_file_range: called by the ioctl(2) system call for FICLONERANGE and > > > FICLONE commands. > > > diff --git a/fs/read_write.c b/fs/read_write.c > > > index c60790f..474e740 100644 > > > --- a/fs/read_write.c > > > +++ b/fs/read_write.c > > > @@ -1578,10 +1578,6 @@ ssize_t vfs_copy_file_range(struct file *file_in, loff_t pos_in, > > > (file_out->f_flags & O_APPEND)) > > > return -EBADF; > > > > > > - /* this could be relaxed once a method supports cross-fs copies */ > > > - if (inode_in->i_sb != inode_out->i_sb) > > > - return -EXDEV; > > > - > > > > You need to hoist this limitation to clone_file_range() syscall, because > > you are not allowed to change user facing behavior. > > Maybe you can later add a uapi flag for copy_file_range() to explicitly allow > > for cross-sb copy? > > Sure I can do that. > > > Maybe you can add the flag now for internal use - only nfsv4 will pass that > > flag to the vfs helper and system call will verify that flags == 0. > > Not only NFS wants it CIFS want it too. Can you please elaborate on what do you mean "internal use only"? nfsv4 doesn't call copy_file_range(), a user land application (such as glibc cp, or whatever does a system call for the copy_file_range()) is the one calling and doing a copy between two different server (ie superblocks). Thus the system call can't keep the check "flags == 0". I can (maybe?) add user level flags that copy_file_range() system call will pass, I will have to remove the "flags == 0" check and then I can add a check if such a flag is passed, then skip the check for the cross device check in copy_file_range(). Is this what's desired? > > > > > Thanks, > > Amir.
