xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFC] add FIEMAP ioctl to efficiently map file allocation

To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFC] add FIEMAP ioctl to efficiently map file allocation
From: Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 09:23:38 +0100
Cc: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20070501223040.GL5722@schatzie.adilger.int>
References: <20070412110550.GM5967@schatzie.adilger.int> <20070416112252.GJ48531920@melbourne.sgi.com> <20070419002139.GK5967@schatzie.adilger.int> <20070419015426.GM48531920@melbourne.sgi.com> <20070430224401.GX5967@schatzie.adilger.int> <20070501042254.GD77450368@melbourne.sgi.com> <20070501223040.GL5722@schatzie.adilger.int>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On 1 May 2007, at 23:30, Andreas Dilger wrote:

On May 01, 2007 14:22 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 04:44:01PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
Hmm, I'd thought "offline" would migrate to EXTENT_UNKNOWN, but I didn't

I disagree - why would you want to indicate the state is unknown when we know
very well that it is offline?

If you don't like "UNKNOWN", what about "UNMAPPED"? I just want a catch-all flag that indicates "this extent contains data but there is nothing sensible to be returned for the extent mapping."

I like UNMAPPED. I even use it in NTFS internally for extents maps that have not been read into memory yet. (-:


On a different issue, do you think it would be worth adding an option flags like FIEMAP_DONT_RELOCATE or something similar that would be a compulsory flag and if set the FS is not allowed to move the file around/change the block allocation of the file.

My thinking is that the extent map is not terribly useful if the FS goes and relocates the file to somewhere else just after you have done the ioctl. For example HFS on OSX automatically defragments files whilst it is running... Linux file systems may one day do similar things.

Or alternatively a flag like FIEMAP_MAKE_DIRECT or something to tell the FS we want to access the actual raw blocks so the FS can make sure the data is on block aligned boundaries and if the FS does not support this (e.g. ZFS or a compressed or encrypted NTFS file) then it can return -ENOTSUP.

Perhaps this is totally the wrong interface and such a "prepare file for direct access" API should be a different ioctl() or syscall or whatever. It just seems very simple and appropriate to combine it here as people who use FIEMAP are at least sometimes going to be wanting to access those blocks directly as well and it feels right to be able to communicate this to the FS in the same call, kind of like an "open intent" of "I want to use the data directly on disk"...

What do you think?

Best regards,

        Anton
--
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Unix Support, Computing Service, University of Cambridge, CB2 3QH, UK
Linux NTFS maintainer, http://www.linux-ntfs.org/



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