On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 10:57:55AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 02:48:52PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 09:04:14AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 01:00:27PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 12:39:14PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 09:10:27AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 12:30:23AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 11:12:10PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Given the above, as far as I know the only remaining objection to this > > > > > > > > patchset would be that DIO constraints aren't sufficiently discoverable > > > > > > > > by userspace. Now, to put this in context, this is a longstanding issue > > > > > > > > with all Linux filesystems, except XFS which has XFS_IOC_DIOINFO. It's > > > > > > > > not specific to this feature, and it doesn't actually seem to be too > > > > > > > > important in practice; many other filesystem features place constraints > > > > > > > > on DIO, and f2fs even *only* allows fully FS block size aligned DIO. > > > > > > > > (And for better or worse, many systems using fscrypt already have > > > > > > > > out-of-tree patches that enable DIO support, and people don't seem to > > > > > > > > have trouble with the FS block size alignment requirement.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It might make sense to use this as an opportunity to implement > > > > > > > XFS_IOC_DIOINFO for ext4 and f2fs. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm. A potential problem with DIOINFO is that it doesn't explicitly > > > > > > list the /file/ position alignment requirement: > > > > > > > > > > > > struct dioattr { > > > > > > __u32 d_mem; /* data buffer memory alignment */ > > > > > > __u32 d_miniosz; /* min xfer size */ > > > > > > __u32 d_maxiosz; /* max xfer size */ > > > > > > }; > > > > > > > > > > Well, the comment above struct dioattr says: > > > > > > > > > > /* > > > > > * Direct I/O attribute record used with XFS_IOC_DIOINFO > > > > > * d_miniosz is the min xfer size, xfer size multiple and file seek offset > > > > > * alignment. > > > > > */ > > > > > > > > > > So d_miniosz serves that purpose already. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I /think/ fscrypt requires that directio writes be aligned to file > > > > > > block size, right? > > > > > > > > > > The file position must be a multiple of the filesystem block size, yes. > > > > > Likewise for the "minimum xfer size" and "xfer size multiple", and the "data > > > > > buffer memory alignment" for that matter. So I think XFS_IOC_DIOINFO would be > > > > > good enough for the fscrypt direct I/O case. > > > > > > > > Oh, ok then. In that case, just hoist XFS_IOC_DIOINFO to the VFS and > > > > add a couple of implementations for ext4 and f2fs, and I think that'll > > > > be enough to get the fscrypt patchset moving again. > > > > > > On the contrary, I'd much prefer to see this information added to > > > statx(). The file offset alignment info is a property of the current > > > file (e.g. XFS can have different per-file requirements depending on > > > whether the file data is hosted on the data or RT device, etc) and > > > so it's not a fixed property of the filesystem. > > > > > > statx() was designed to be extended with per-file property > > > information, and we already have stuff like filesystem block size in > > > that syscall. Hence I would much prefer that we extend it with the > > > DIO properties we need to support rather than "create" a new VFS > > > ioctl to extract this information. We already have statx(), so let's > > > use it for what it was intended for. Eh, ok. Let's do that instead. > > > > > > > I assumed that XFS_IOC_DIOINFO *was* per-file. XFS's *implementation* of it > > looks at the filesystem only, > > You've got that wrong. > > case XFS_IOC_DIOINFO: { > >>>>>> struct xfs_buftarg *target = xfs_inode_buftarg(ip); > struct dioattr da; > > da.d_mem = da.d_miniosz = target->bt_logical_sectorsize; > > xfs_inode_buftarg() is determining which block device the inode is > storing it's data on, so the returned dioattr values can be > different for different inodes in the filesystem... > > It's always been that way since the early Irix days - XFS RT devices > could have very different IO constraints than the data device and > DIO had to conform to the hardware limits underlying the filesystem. > Hence the dioattr information has -always- been per-inode > information. > > > (Per-file state is required for encrypted > > files. It's also required for other filesystem features; e.g., files that use > > compression or fs-verity don't support direct I/O at all.) > > Which is exactly why is should be a property of statx(), rather than > try to re-use a ~30 year old filesystem specific API from a > different OS that was never intended to indicate things like "DIO > not supported on this file at all".... Heh. You mean like ALLOCSP? Ok ok point taken. > We've been bitten many times by this "lift a rarely used filesystem > specific ioctl to the VFS because it exists" method of API > promotion. It almost always ends up in us discovering further down > the track that there's something wrong with the API, it doesn't > quite do what we need, we have to extend it anyway, or it's just > plain borken, etc. And then we have to create a new, fit for purpose > API anyway, and there's two VFS APIs we have to maintain forever > instead of just one... > > Can we learn from past mistakes this time instead of repeating them > yet again? Sure. How's this? I couldn't think of a real case of directio requiring different alignments for pos and bytecount, so the only real addition here is the alignment requirements for best performance. struct statx { ... /* 0x90 */ __u64 stx_mnt_id; /* Memory buffer alignment required for directio, in bytes. */ __u32 stx_dio_mem_align; /* File range alignment required for directio, in bytes. */ __u32 stx_dio_fpos_align_min; /* 0xa0 */ /* File range alignment needed for best performance, in bytes. */ __u32 stx_dio_fpos_align_opt; /* Maximum size of a directio request, in bytes. */ __u32 stx_dio_max_iosize; __u64 __spare3[11]; /* Spare space for future expansion */ /* 0x100 */ }; Along with: #define STATX_DIRECTIO 0x00001000U /* Want/got directio geometry */ How about that? --D > > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx