svn commit: r220791 - in head: lib/libc/sys sys/compat/freebsd32 sys/kern sys/sys

Kostik Belousov kostikbel at gmail.com
Mon Apr 18 20:13:07 UTC 2011


On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:49:38PM -0700, mdf at freebsd.org wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Kostik Belousov <kostikbel at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 04:32:22PM +0000, Matthew D Fleming wrote:
> >> Author: mdf
> >> Date: Mon Apr 18 16:32:22 2011
> >> New Revision: 220791
> >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/220791
> >>
> >> Log:
> >>   Add the posix_fallocate(2) syscall.  The default implementation in
> >>   vop_stdallocate() is filesystem agnostic and will run as slow as a
> >>   read/write loop in userspace; however, it serves to correctly
> >>   implement the functionality for filesystems that do not implement a
> >>   VOP_ALLOCATE.
> >>
> >>   Note that __FreeBSD_version was already bumped today to 900036 for any
> >>   ports which would like to use this function.
> >>
> >>   Also reserve space in the syscall table for posix_fadvise(2).
> 
> >> +#ifdef __notyet__
> >> +     /*
> >> +      * Check if the filesystem sets f_maxfilesize; if not use
> >> +      * VOP_SETATTR to perform the check.
> >> +      */
> >> +     error = VFS_STATFS(vp->v_mount, &sfs, td);
> >> +     if (error != 0)
> >> +             goto out;
> >> +     if (sfs.f_maxfilesize) {
> >> +             if (offset > sfs.f_maxfilesize || len > sfs.f_maxfilesize ||
> >> +                 offset + len > sfs.f_maxfilesize) {
> >> +                     error = EFBIG;
> >> +                     goto out;
> >> +             }
> >> +     } else
> >> +#endif
> >> +     if (offset + len > vap->va_size) {
> >> +             VATTR_NULL(vap);
> >> +             vap->va_size = offset + len;
> >> +             error = VOP_SETATTR(vp, vap, td->td_ucred);
> >> +             if (error != 0)
> >> +                     goto out;
> >> +     }
> > I still do not see a reason to do VOP_SETATTR() there. VOP_WRITE() will
> > do auto-extend as needed. Also, see below.
> 
> The need is, as commented, to return EFBIG when the new file size will
> be larger than the FS supports.  Without this code, passing in
> something like posix_fallocate(fd, 0, OFF_MAX) will run the filesystem
> out of space.
Handling max file size and not overflowing the fs are different things.
VOP_WRITE() will handle file size on its own too. I see no problem with
exhausting free space if this is what user asked for.

> 
> >> +
> >> +     while (len > 0) {
> >> +             if (should_yield()) {
> >> +                     VOP_UNLOCK(vp, 0);
> >> +                     locked = 0;
> >> +                     kern_yield(-1);
> > Please note that, despite dropping the vnode lock, the snapshot creation
> > is still blocked at this point, due to previous vn_start_write().
> >
> > If doing vn_finished_write() there, then bwillwrite() before
> > next iteration is desired.
> >> +                     error = vn_lock(vp, LK_EXCLUSIVE);
> >> +                     if (error != 0)
> >> +                             break;
> >> +                     locked = 1;
> >> +                     error = VOP_GETATTR(vp, vap, td->td_ucred);
> >> +                     if (error != 0)
> >> +                             break;
> >> +             }
> >> +
> >> +             /*
> >> +              * Read and write back anything below the nominal file
> >> +              * size.  There's currently no way outside the filesystem
> >> +              * to know whether this area is sparse or not.
> >> +              */
> >> +             cur = iosize;
> >> +             if ((offset % iosize) != 0)
> >> +                     cur -= (offset % iosize);
> >> +             if (cur > len)
> >> +                     cur = len;
> >> +             if (offset < vap->va_size) {
> >> +                     aiov.iov_base = buf;
> >> +                     aiov.iov_len = cur;
> >> +                     auio.uio_iov = &aiov;
> >> +                     auio.uio_iovcnt = 1;
> >> +                     auio.uio_offset = offset;
> >> +                     auio.uio_resid = cur;
> >> +                     auio.uio_segflg = UIO_SYSSPACE;
> >> +                     auio.uio_rw = UIO_READ;
> >> +                     auio.uio_td = td;
> >> +                     error = VOP_READ(vp, &auio, 0, td->td_ucred);
> >> +                     if (error != 0)
> >> +                             break;
> >> +                     if (auio.uio_resid > 0) {
> >> +                             bzero(buf + cur - auio.uio_resid,
> >> +                                 auio.uio_resid);
> >> +                     }
> >> +             } else {
> >> +                     bzero(buf, cur);
> >> +             }
> > Wouldn't VOP_SETATTR() at the start of the function mostly prevent
> > this bzero from executing ?
> 
> Yes.  If struct statfs had a member indicating the file system's max
> file size, then the extend wouldn't be necessary.  We have that
> feature locally, but it's only implemented for ufs and our custom file
> system, and it requires an ABI change so it's a bit of work to
> upstream.  And as with most of those things, it's hard to find the
> time to upstream it outside of work hours.
> 
> > I estimated what it would take to do the optimized implementation for UFS,
> > and I think that the following change would allow to lessen the code
> > duplication much.
> >
> > What if the vnode lock drop and looping be handled by the syscall, instead
> > of the vop implementation ? In other words, allow the VOP_ALLOCATE()
> > to  allocate less then requested, and return the allocated amount to
> > the caller. The loop would be centralized then, freeing fs from doing
> > the dance. Also, if fs considers that suitable, it would do a whole
> > allocation in one run.
> 
> I like this idea.  Perhaps input to the vop should be pointers to
> offset and len, and the vop can change them as it iterates? Otherwise
> the return code must be overloaded to distinguish between an error
> code and the len that has been handled so far.  And, I think the VOP
> interface must return int, so there would be no way to indicate that
> more than 2GB had been allocated.
> 
> So something in the kernel like:
> 	while ((error = VOP_ALLOCATE(vp, &offset, &len)) == EAGAIN) {
> 		VOP_UNLOCK(vp, 0);
> 		/* XXX unlock other resources */
> 		maybe_yield();
> 		bwillwrite();
> 		/* XXX vn_start_write dance */
> 		error = VOP_LOCK(vp, LK_EXCLUSIVE);
> 	}
Exactly. I would not even bother to return EAGAIN, just 0, and the need
to retry the loop can be determined by len being non-zero.

Also, by rearranging the loop, we can avoid the duplication of
calls to bwillwrite, vn_start_write, vn_lock etc.

	for (;;) {
		/* All error handling is removed for convenience */
		bwillwrite();
		vn_start_write();
		vn_lock();
		VOP_ALLOCATE(vp, &offset, &len);
		VOP_UNLOCK();
		vn_finished_write();
		if (len == 0)
			break;
		yield();
	}
> 
> Cheers,
> matthew
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-all/attachments/20110418/4e9e58cf/attachment.pgp


More information about the svn-src-all mailing list