On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 01:17:02PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> > +static struct iomap_page *
> > +iomap_page_create(struct inode *inode, struct page *page)
> > +{
> > + struct iomap_page *iop = to_iomap_page(page);
> > +
> > + if (iop || i_blocksize(inode) == PAGE_SIZE)
> > + return iop;
> > +
> > + iop = kmalloc(sizeof(*iop), GFP_NOFS | __GFP_NOFAIL);
> > + atomic_set(&iop->read_count, 0);
> > + atomic_set(&iop->write_count, 0);
> > + bitmap_zero(iop->uptodate, PAGE_SIZE / SECTOR_SIZE);
> > + set_page_private(page, (unsigned long)iop);
> > + SetPagePrivate(page);
>
> The buffer head implementation does a get/put page when the private
> state is set. I'm not quite sure why that is tbh, but do you know
> whether we need that here or not?
I don't really see any good reason why that would be needed, as we need
a successfull ->releasepage return to drop the page from the page cache.
I'll look around a little more if there is any other reason for it -
adding get/put page pair here would be easy to do, so maybe we should just
cargo-cult it in to be on the safe side.
> > - return plen;
> > + return pos - orig_pos + plen;
>
> A brief comment here (or above the adjust_read_range() call) to explain
> the final length calculation would be helpful. E.g., it looks like
> leading uptodate blocks are part of the read while trailing uptodate
> blocks can be truncated by the above call.
Ok.
> > +int
> > +iomap_is_partially_uptodate(struct page *page, unsigned long from,
> > + unsigned long count)
> > +{
> > + struct iomap_page *iop = to_iomap_page(page);
> > + struct inode *inode = page->mapping->host;
> > + unsigned first = from >> inode->i_blkbits;
> > + unsigned last = (from + count - 1) >> inode->i_blkbits;
> > + unsigned i;
> > +
>
> block_is_partially_uptodate() has this check:
>
> if (from < blocksize && to > PAGE_SIZE - blocksize)
> return 0;
>
> ... which looks like it checks that the range is actually partial wrt to
> block size. The only callers check the page first, but I'm still not
> sure why it returns 0 in that case. Any idea?
The calling convention is generally pretty insane. I plan to clean
this up, but didn't want to grow my XFS-related series even more.
> > +{
> > + /*
> > + * If we are invalidating the entire page, clear the dirty state from it
> > + * and release it to avoid unnecessary buildup of the LRU.
> > + */
> > + if (offset == 0 && len == PAGE_SIZE) {
> > + cancel_dirty_page(page);
> > + iomap_releasepage(page, GFP_NOIO);
>
> Seems like this should probably be calling ->releasepage().
Not really. I don't want the fs in the loop here. My other option
was to have a iomap_page_free helper called here and in ->releasepage.
Maybe I'll move back to that is it is less confusing.
> > @@ -333,6 +529,7 @@ static int
> > __iomap_write_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t pos, unsigned len,
> > struct page *page, struct iomap *iomap)
> > {
> > + struct iomap_page *iop = iomap_page_create(inode, page);
> > loff_t block_size = i_blocksize(inode);
> > loff_t block_start = pos & ~(block_size - 1);
> > loff_t block_end = (pos + len + block_size - 1) & ~(block_size - 1);
> > @@ -340,15 +537,29 @@ __iomap_write_begin(struct inode *inode, loff_t pos, unsigned len,
> > unsigned plen = min_t(loff_t, PAGE_SIZE - poff, block_end - block_start);
>
> poff/plen are now initialized here and in iomap_adjust_read_range().
> Perhaps drop this one so the semantic of these being set by the latter
> is a bit more clear?
Yes, will do.
> > +
> > + do {
> > + iomap_adjust_read_range(inode, iop, &block_start,
> > + block_end - block_start, &poff, &plen);
> > + if (plen == 0)
> > + break;
> > +
> > + if ((from > poff && from < poff + plen) ||
> > + (to > poff && to < poff + plen)) {
> > + status = iomap_read_page_sync(inode, block_start, page,
> > + poff, plen, from, to, iomap);
> > + if (status)
> > + return status;
> > + }
> > +
> > + block_start += plen;
> > + } while (poff + plen < PAGE_SIZE);
>
> Something like while (block_start < block_end) would seem a bit more
> clear here as well.
I'll look into it.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
