Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] clean up and generalize swap-over-NFS

From: Omar Sandoval
Date: Tue Jan 13 2015 - 22:18:52 EST


On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 07:18:24PM -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch series (based on ecb5ec0 in Linus' tree) contains all of the
> non-BTRFS work that I've done to implement swapfiles on BTRFS. The BTRFS
> portion is still undergoing development and is now outweighed by the
> non-BTRFS changes, so I want to get these in separately.
>
> Version 2 changes the generic swapfile interface to use ->read_iter and
> ->write_iter instead of using ->direct_IO directly in response to
> discussion on the previous submission. It also adds the iov_iter_is_bvec
> helper to factor out some common checks.
>
> Version 1 can be found here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/12/15/7
>
> Omar Sandoval (5):
> iov_iter: add ITER_BVEC helpers
> direct-io: don't dirty ITER_BVEC pages on read
> nfs: don't dirty ITER_BVEC pages read through direct I/O
> swapfile: use ->read_iter and ->write_iter
> vfs: update swap_{,de}activate documentation
>
> Documentation/filesystems/Locking | 7 ++++---
> Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt | 7 ++++---
> fs/direct-io.c | 8 ++++---
> fs/nfs/direct.c | 5 ++++-
> fs/splice.c | 7 ++-----
> include/linux/uio.h | 7 +++++++
> mm/iov_iter.c | 12 +++++++++++
> mm/page_io.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> mm/swapfile.c | 11 +++++++++-
> 9 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.2.1
>

Hi, everyone,

Thanks for all of the feedback on the last few iterations of this
series. If it's alright, I'd like to revive the conversation around
these patches.

There are a couple of issues which we were discussing before the
holidays:

One concern that Al mentioned was ->read_iter and ->write_iter falling
back to the buffered I/O case. Like Christoph mentioned, this can be
prevented by doing the proper checks on the filesystem side (usually
just making sure that all blocks of a swapfile are allocated, but on
BTRFS, for example, we also have to check for compressed extents).

The other concern which Al brought up was that ->read_iter is passed a
locked page in the iter_bvec and could end up trying to lock it. I'm not
too sure under what conditions that would happen -- could someone give
an example? My intuition is that there's no path which will lead us to
deadlock on a page in the swapcache, but I don't have anything solid to
back that up.

Thanks!
--
Omar
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/