On Thu 25-09-14 11:32:16, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 05:03:22PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > ->page_mkwrite() is used by filesystems to allocate blocks under a page
> > which is becoming writeably mmapped in some process' address space. This
> > allows a filesystem to return a page fault if there is not enough space
> > available, user exceeds quota or similar problem happens, rather than
> > silently discarding data later when writepage is called.
> >
> > However VFS fails to call ->page_mkwrite() in all the cases where
> > filesystems need it when blocksize < pagesize. For example when
> > blocksize = 1024, pagesize = 4096 the following is problematic:
> > ftruncate(fd, 0);
> > pwrite(fd, buf, 1024, 0);
> > map = mmap(NULL, 1024, PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, fd, 0);
> > map[0] = 'a'; ----> page_mkwrite() for index 0 is called
> > ftruncate(fd, 10000); /* or even pwrite(fd, buf, 1, 10000) */
> > mremap(map, 1024, 10000, 0);
> > map[4095] = 'a'; ----> no page_mkwrite() called
> >
> > At the moment ->page_mkwrite() is called, filesystem can allocate only
> > one block for the page because i_size == 1024. Otherwise it would create
> > blocks beyond i_size which is generally undesirable. But later at
> > ->writepage() time, we also need to store data at offset 4095 but we
> > don't have block allocated for it.
> ...
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> > +/**
> > + * block_create_hole - handle creation of a hole in a file
> > + * @inode: inode where the hole is created
> > + * @from: offset in bytes where the hole starts
> > + * @to: offset in bytes where the hole ends.
>
> This function doesn't create holes. It also manipulates page state,
> not block state. Probably could do with a better name, but I'm not
> sure what a better name is - something like
> pagecache_extend_isize(old_eof, new_eof)?
Yeah, you are right. I should be actually better off moving that function
to mm/truncate.c. Regarding the name I agree block_create_hole() isn't
very accurate but I don't like pagecache_extend_isize() too much either -
see below for reason.
> > +void block_create_hole(struct inode *inode, loff_t from, loff_t to)
> > +{
> > + int bsize = 1 << inode->i_blkbits;
> > + loff_t rounded_from;
> > + struct page *page;
> > + pgoff_t index;
> > +
> > + WARN_ON(!mutex_is_locked(&inode->i_mutex));
> > + WARN_ON(to > inode->i_size);
>
> We've already changed i_size, so shouldn't that be:
Not quite. When you have 1k blocksize, filesize == 512 and you do
pwrite(file, buf, 1024, 8192);
Then you want the function to be called for range 512 - 8192, however
i_size is already 9216. So the assertion is correct as is. This is also
the reason why I don't like pagecache_extend_isize() because it suggests
'to' is the final i_size but it's not.
Maybe the most simple interface would be to really call the function
pagecache_extend_isize(), let it take just 'to' and it will write the new
i_size and handle pagecache tricks. The extending writes will then be
handled by first calling pagecache_extend_isize() to extend to 'pos' and
then just i_size_write() the final size...
Honza
> WARN_ON(to != inode->i_size);
>
> > +
> > + if (from >= to || bsize == PAGE_CACHE_SIZE)
> > + return;
> > + /* Currently last page will not have any hole block created? */
> > + rounded_from = ALIGN(from, bsize);
>
> That rounds down? or up? round_down/round_up are much better than
> ALIGN() because they tell you exactly what rounding was intended...
Good point. I'll use round_up().
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>