lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v4] ceph: use 'copy-from2' operation in copy_file_range
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 3:30 PM Luis Henriques <lhenriques@suse.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 08:06:17AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-01-08 at 10:03 +0000, Luis Henriques wrote:
> > > Instead of using the 'copy-from' operation, switch copy_file_range to the
> > > new 'copy-from2' operation, which allows to send the truncate_seq and
> > > truncate_size parameters.
> > >
> > > If an OSD does not support the 'copy-from2' operation it will return
> > > -EOPNOTSUPP. In that case, the kernel client will stop trying to do
> > > remote object copies for this fs client and will always use the generic
> > > VFS copy_file_range.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <lhenriques@suse.com>
> > > ---
> > > Hi Jeff,
> > >
> > > This is a follow-up to the discussion in [1]. Since PR [2] has been
> > > merged, it's now time to change the kernel client to use the new
> > > 'copy-from2'. And that's what this patch does.
> > >
> > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191118120935.7013-1-lhenriques@suse.com/
> > > [2] https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/31728
> > >
> > > fs/ceph/file.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
> > > fs/ceph/super.c | 1 +
> > > fs/ceph/super.h | 3 +++
> > > include/linux/ceph/osd_client.h | 1 +
> > > include/linux/ceph/rados.h | 2 ++
> > > net/ceph/osd_client.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
> > > 6 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/ceph/file.c b/fs/ceph/file.c
> > > index 11929d2bb594..1e6cdf2dfe90 100644
> > > --- a/fs/ceph/file.c
> > > +++ b/fs/ceph/file.c
> > > @@ -1974,6 +1974,10 @@ static ssize_t __ceph_copy_file_range(struct file *src_file, loff_t src_off,
> > > if (ceph_test_mount_opt(src_fsc, NOCOPYFROM))
> > > return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > >
> > > + /* Do the OSDs support the 'copy-from2' operation? */
> > > + if (!src_fsc->have_copy_from2)
> > > + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * Striped file layouts require that we copy partial objects, but the
> > > * OSD copy-from operation only supports full-object copies. Limit
> > > @@ -2101,8 +2105,15 @@ static ssize_t __ceph_copy_file_range(struct file *src_file, loff_t src_off,
> > > CEPH_OSD_OP_FLAG_FADVISE_NOCACHE,
> > > &dst_oid, &dst_oloc,
> > > CEPH_OSD_OP_FLAG_FADVISE_SEQUENTIAL |
> > > - CEPH_OSD_OP_FLAG_FADVISE_DONTNEED, 0);
> > > + CEPH_OSD_OP_FLAG_FADVISE_DONTNEED,
> > > + dst_ci->i_truncate_seq, dst_ci->i_truncate_size,
> > > + CEPH_OSD_COPY_FROM_FLAG_TRUNCATE_SEQ);
> > > if (err) {
> > > + if (err == -EOPNOTSUPP) {
> > > + src_fsc->have_copy_from2 = false;
> > > + pr_notice("OSDs don't support 'copy-from2'; "
> > > + "disabling copy_file_range\n");
> > > + }
> > > dout("ceph_osdc_copy_from returned %d\n", err);
> > > if (!ret)
> > > ret = err;
> >
> > The patch itself looks fine to me. I'll not merge yet, since you sent it
> > as an RFC, but I don't have any objection to it at first glance.
>
> I was going to drop the RFC, but then at the last minute decided to leave.
>
> > The
> > only other comment I'd make is that you should probably split this into
> > two patches -- one for the libceph changes and one for cephfs.
>
> Hmm... TBH I didn't thought about that, but since the libceph patch would
> be changing its API (ceph_osdc_copy_from would have 2 extra parameters), I
> don't think that's a good idea. Bisection would be broken between these 2
> patches.

Yeah, no need to split.

Thanks,

Ilya

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-01-09 15:53    [W:0.162 / U:3.532 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site