[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/6] fs: add hole punching to fallocate

To: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] fs: add hole punching to fallocate
From: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 22:53:57 +0100
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, joel.becker@xxxxxxxxxx, cmm@xxxxxxxxxx, cluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20101109214147.GK3099@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <1289248327-16308-1-git-send-email-josef@xxxxxxxxxx> <20101109011222.GD2715@dastard> <20101109033038.GF3099@xxxxxxxxx> <20101109044242.GH2715@dastard> <20101109214147.GK3099@xxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
On Tue 09-11-10 16:41:47, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 03:42:42PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > Implementation is up to the filesystem. However, XFS does (b)
> > because:
> > 
> >     1) it was extremely simple to implement (one of the
> >        advantages of having an exceedingly complex allocation
> >        interface to begin with :P)
> >     2) conversion is atomic, fast and reliable
> >     3) it is independent of the underlying storage; and
> >     4) reads of unwritten extents operate at memory speed,
> >        not disk speed.
> Yeah, I was thinking that using a device-style TRIM might be better
> since future attempts to write to it won't require a separate seek to
> modify the extent tree.  But yeah, there are a bunch of advantages of
> simply mutating the extent tree.
> While we're on the subject of changes to fallocate, what do people
> think of FALLOC_FL_EXPOSE_OLD_DATA, which requires either root
> privileges or (if capabilities are in use) CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE &&
> CAP_MAC_OVERRIDE && CAP_SYS_ADMIN.  This would allow a trusted process
> to fallocate blocks with the extent already marked initialized.  I've
> had two requests for such functionality for ext4 already.  
> (Take for example a trusted cluster filesystem backend that checks the
> object checksum before returning any data to the user; and if the
> check fails the cluster file system will try to use some other replica
> stored on some other server.)
  Hum, could you elaborate a bit? I fail to see how above fallocate() flag
could be used to help solving this problem... Just curious...

Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>