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.Schumaker@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> 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_"?
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?
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-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
