Thread (20 messages) 20 messages, 5 authors, 2020-01-23

Re: [PATCH 1/2] fs: allow deduplication of eof block into the end of the destination file

From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@kernel.org>
Date: 2020-01-14 14:36:24
Also in: linux-fsdevel, linux-xfs

On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 7:12 PM Darrick J. Wong [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 07:00:09PM +0000, Filipe Manana wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 4:15 PM Darrick J. Wong [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 11:36:04AM +0000, Filipe Manana wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 5:57 PM Darrick J. Wong [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 04:23:15PM +0000, Filipe Manana wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 6:28 PM [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
From: Filipe Manana <redacted>

We always round down, to a multiple of the filesystem's block size, the
length to deduplicate at generic_remap_check_len().  However this is only
needed if an attempt to deduplicate the last block into the middle of the
destination file is requested, since that leads into a corruption if the
length of the source file is not block size aligned.  When an attempt to
deduplicate the last block into the end of the destination file is
requested, we should allow it because it is safe to do it - there's no
stale data exposure and we are prepared to compare the data ranges for
a length not aligned to the block (or page) size - in fact we even do
the data compare before adjusting the deduplication length.

After btrfs was updated to use the generic helpers from VFS (by commit
34a28e3d77535e ("Btrfs: use generic_remap_file_range_prep() for cloning
and deduplication")) we started to have user reports of deduplication
not reflinking the last block anymore, and whence users getting lower
deduplication scores.  The main use case is deduplication of entire
files that have a size not aligned to the block size of the filesystem.

We already allow cloning the last block to the end (and beyond) of the
destination file, so allow for deduplication as well.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/2019-1576167349.500456@svIo.N5dq.dFFD/ (local)
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <redacted>
Darrick, Al, any feedback?
Is there a fstest to check for correct operation of dedupe at or beyond
source and destfile EOF?  Particularly if one range is /not/ at EOF?
Such as what generic/158 does already?
Urk, heh. :)
quoted
quoted
And that an mmap read of the EOF block will see zeroes past EOF before
and after the dedupe operation?
Can you elaborate a bit more? Why an mmap read and not a buffered or a
direct IO read before and after deduplication?
Is there anything special for the mmap reads on xfs, is that your
concern? Or is the idea to deduplicate while the file is mmap'ed?
I cite mmap reads past EOF specifically because unlike buffered/direct
reads where the VFS will stop reading exactly at EOF, a memory mapping
maps in an entire memory page, and the fs is supposed to ensure that the
bytes past EOF are zeroed.
Ok, on btrfs we zero out the rest of the page both in for all reads.

So, it's not problem:

$ file_size=$((64 * 1024 + 500))
$ xfs_io -f -c "pwrite -S 0xba 0 $file_size" foo
$ xfs_io -f -c "pwrite -S 0xba 0 $file_size" bar
$ sync

$ xfs_io -c "mmap 0 68K" -c "mread -v 0 68K" -c "dedupe bar 0 0
$file_size" -c "mread -v 0 68K" foo

Both mreads returns exactly the same, eof is still the same and all
bytes after it have a value of 0.

This is the same as it is for cloning.
Oh good. :)
quoted
quoted
Hm now that I look at g/158 it doesn't actually verify mmap reads.  I
looked around and can't really see anything that checks mmap reads
before and after a dedupe operation at EOF.
quoted
quoted
If I fallocate a 16k file, write 'X' into the first 5000 bytes,
write 'X' into the first 66,440 bytes (60k + 5000) of a second file, and
then try to dedupe (first file, 0-8k) with (second file, 60k-68k),
should that work?
You haven't mentioned the size of the second file, nor if the first
file has a size of 16K which I assume (instead of fallocate with the
keep size flag).
Er, sorry, yes.  The first file is 16,384 bytes long; the second file is
66,440 bytes.
quoted
Anyway, I assume you actually meant to dedupe the range 0 - 5000 from
the first file into the range 60k - 60k + 5000 of the second file, and
that the second file has a size of 60k + 5000.
Nope, I meant to say to dedupe the range (offset: 0, length: 8192) from
the first file into the second file (offset: 61440, length: 8192).  The
source range is entirely below EOF, and the dest range ends right at
EOF in the second file.
The dedupe operations fails with -EINVAL, both before and after this patch,
since the whenever one of ranges crosses eof, we must fail dedupe with -EINVAL.
This happens at generic_remap_checks(), which called before
generic_remap_check_len().

This is no different from the other existing tests in fstests, which
cover this case already.
Ah, ok.
quoted
quoted
quoted
If so, that fails with -EINVAL because the source range is not block
size aligned, and we already have generic fstests that test attempt to
duplication and clone non-aligned ranges that don't end at eof.
This patch doesn't change that behaviour, it only aims to allow
deduplication of the eof block of the source file into the eof of the
destination file.

quoted
I'm convinced that we could support dedupe to EOF when the ranges of the
two files both end at the respective file's EOF, but it's the weirder
corner cases that I worry about...
Well, we used to do that in btrfs before migrating to the generic code.
Since I discovered the corruption due to deduplication of the eof
block into the middle of a file in 2018's summer, the btrfs fix
allowed deduplication of the eof block only if the destination end
offset matched the eof of the destination file:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=de02b9f6bb65a6a1848f346f7a3617b7a9b930c0

Since then no issues were found nor users reported any problems so far.
<nod> I'm ok with that one scenario, it's the "one range ends at eof,
the other doesn't" case that I'm picking on. :)

(Another way to shut me up would be to run generic/52[12] with
TIME_FACTOR=1000 (i.e. 1 billion fsx ops) and see what comes exploding
out. :))
Well, it will take nearly 2 weeks to get those tests to complete with
1 billion ops, taking into
account each takes around 500 seconds to run here (on xfs) with 1
million operations...
I know.  I probably should have clarified: every month or two I build a
kernel from tip, throw it in a VM, and let it run for however long it
goes until it dies, fixing whatever problems as I find them.

*So far* no billionaire plutocrats have complained about the huge
compute bills that are probably racking up. ;)

(FWIW I also tossed your patch onto another one of these VMs and it
hasn't died yet, so that's probably an ok sign)
For 100 million ops, on 5.5-rc5 kernel with this patchset and on xfs:

$ TIME_FACTOR=100 MKFS_OPTIONS="-m reflink=1,rmapbt=1" ./check
generic/521 generic/522
FSTYP         -- xfs (debug)
PLATFORM      -- Linux/x86_64 debian5 5.5.0-rc5-btrfs-next-67 #1 SMP
PREEMPT Thu Jan 9 13:48:07 WET 2020
MKFS_OPTIONS  -- -f -m reflink=1,rmapbt=1 /dev/sdc
MOUNT_OPTIONS -- /dev/sdc /home/fdmanana/btrfs-tests/scratch_1

generic/521 482s ...  48961s
generic/522 536s ...  54432s
Ran: generic/521 generic/522
Passed all 2 tests

Similar for btrfs, no problems found (yet at least).

Thanks.
quoted
quoted
quoted
Any other specific test you would like to see?
No, just that.  And mmap reads. :)
Given that we allow cloning of eof into eof already (and that doesn't
cause any known problems),
I don't see why you are so concerned with allowing dedupe to behave the same.

The only thing I can see it could be a problem would be comparing the
contents of the last page beyond the eof position,
but as stated on the changelog, it's not a problem since we call
vfs_dedupe_file_range_compare() before we
round down the length at generic_remap_check_len() - the data compare
function already has the correct behaviour.
<nod>

--D
quoted
Thanks.
quoted
--D
quoted
Thanks.
quoted
--D
quoted
Thanks.
quoted
---
 fs/read_write.c | 10 ++++------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/read_write.c b/fs/read_write.c
index 5bbf587f5bc1..7458fccc59e1 100644
--- a/fs/read_write.c
+++ b/fs/read_write.c
@@ -1777,10 +1777,9 @@ static int remap_verify_area(struct file *file, loff_t pos, loff_t len,
  * else.  Assume that the offsets have already been checked for block
  * alignment.
  *
- * For deduplication we always scale down to the previous block because we
- * can't meaningfully compare post-EOF contents.
- *
- * For clone we only link a partial EOF block above the destination file's EOF.
+ * For clone we only link a partial EOF block above or at the destination file's
+ * EOF.  For deduplication we accept a partial EOF block only if it ends at the
+ * destination file's EOF (can not link it into the middle of a file).
  *
  * Shorten the request if possible.
  */
@@ -1796,8 +1795,7 @@ static int generic_remap_check_len(struct inode *inode_in,
        if ((*len & blkmask) == 0)
                return 0;

-       if ((remap_flags & REMAP_FILE_DEDUP) ||
-           pos_out + *len < i_size_read(inode_out))
+       if (pos_out + *len < i_size_read(inode_out))
                new_len &= ~blkmask;

        if (new_len == *len)
--
2.11.0
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help