xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 4/5] dax: use sb_issue_zerout instead of calling dax_clear_se

To: "Verma, Vishal L" <vishal.l.verma@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] dax: use sb_issue_zerout instead of calling dax_clear_sectors
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 14:20:39 -0700
Cc: "linux-block@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-block@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx" <linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx>, "viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "axboe@xxxxxx" <axboe@xxxxxx>, "akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-nvdimm@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-nvdimm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "ross.zwisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ross.zwisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Wilcox, Matthew R" <matthew.r.wilcox@xxxxxxxxx>, "david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "jack@xxxxxxx" <jack@xxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=EExCQm1J3LSspzr3hRdrRdW0PHIvfydNMwcrvUXBNhc=; b=rroQrN/JIBcfTBgWFn+MgjUbCILdD5n21uNS5zZxNp6ouuEwE4Br90RE28V5B93bKN knlFGQKk2RtxX5YiJUGWb/h4pJh8raXyZDZdF5KQpXSZMml0LZRlTvBGOUgKGtOcoQEx tgIZK6FJt8fsVzHv/6hPjlYO+SXaMC9fXSrtYMSlxsLCmyjUZ7GZ19C5eEbq7mMPuEEx 8rlPfXj8F4jpFupT6vKP37nXPTplvbqr37sk9ndklc2BNlyHi8bDZHP4WwO/paZDo2Wh wSyZIrBG388800wM7DLtG72HvulxsDS2C9QYinZmLWWRW8xfgkvi5iM+c+i6sp9fPSRd u9qw==
In-reply-to: <1458939796.5501.8.camel@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <1458861450-17705-1-git-send-email-vishal.l.verma@xxxxxxxxx> <1458861450-17705-5-git-send-email-vishal.l.verma@xxxxxxxxx> <CAPcyv4iKK=1Nhz4QqEkhc4gum+UvUS4a=+Sza2zSa1Kyrth41w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1458939796.5501.8.camel@xxxxxxxxx>
On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Verma, Vishal L
<vishal.l.verma@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-03-25 at 11:47 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@xxxxxxx
>> om> wrote:
>> >
>> > From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >
>> > dax_clear_sectors() cannot handle poisoned blocks.  These must be
>> > zeroed using the BIO interface instead.  Convert ext2 and XFS to
>> > use
>> > only sb_issue_zerout().
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > [vishal: Also remove the dax_clear_sectors function entirely]
>> > Signed-off-by: Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> >  fs/dax.c               | 32 --------------------------------
>> >  fs/ext2/inode.c        |  7 +++----
>> >  fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c |  9 ---------
>> >  include/linux/dax.h    |  1 -
>> >  4 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
>> > index bb7e9f8..a30481e 100644
>> > --- a/fs/dax.c
>> > +++ b/fs/dax.c
>> > @@ -78,38 +78,6 @@ struct page *read_dax_sector(struct block_device
>> > *bdev, sector_t n)
>> >         return page;
>> >  }
>> >
>> > -/*
>> > - * dax_clear_sectors() is called from within transaction context
>> > from XFS,
>> > - * and hence this means the stack from this point must follow
>> > GFP_NOFS
>> > - * semantics for all operations.
>> > - */
>> > -int dax_clear_sectors(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t _sector,
>> > long _size)
>> > -{
>> > -       struct blk_dax_ctl dax = {
>> > -               .sector = _sector,
>> > -               .size = _size,
>> > -       };
>> > -
>> > -       might_sleep();
>> > -       do {
>> > -               long count, sz;
>> > -
>> > -               count = dax_map_atomic(bdev, &dax);
>> > -               if (count < 0)
>> > -                       return count;
>> > -               sz = min_t(long, count, SZ_128K);
>> > -               clear_pmem(dax.addr, sz);
>> > -               dax.size -= sz;
>> > -               dax.sector += sz / 512;
>> > -               dax_unmap_atomic(bdev, &dax);
>> > -               cond_resched();
>> > -       } while (dax.size);
>> > -
>> > -       wmb_pmem();
>> > -       return 0;
>> > -}
>> > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dax_clear_sectors);
>> What about the other unwritten extent conversions in the dax path?
>> Shouldn't those be converted to block-layer zero-outs as well?
>
> Could you point me to where these might be? I thought once we've
> converted all the zeroout type callers (by removing dax_clear_sectors),
> and fixed up dax_do_io to try a driver fallback, we've handled all the
> media error cases in dax..

grep for usages of clear_pmem()... which I was hoping to eliminate
after this change to push zeroing down to the driver.

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