Re: bug#48833: reflink copying does not check/set No_COW attribute and fail
From: A L <hidden>
Date: 2021-06-27 10:56:37
On 2021-06-08 04:41, Zygo Blaxell wrote: > On Sun, Jun 06, 2021 at 10:47:05PM -0700, Paul Eggert wrote: >> On 6/5/21 10:42 PM, Zygo Blaxell wrote: >>> If cp -a implements the inode attribute propagation (or inheritance), then >>> only users of cp -a are impacted. They are more likely to be aware that >>> they may be creating new files with reduced-integrity storage attributes. >> >> True, although I think this aspect of attribute-copying will typically come >> as a surprise even to "cp -a" users. > > Existing users might be surprised when "cp -a" starts replicating storage > attributes when it did not do so before, but I suspect most future cp > users would expect "cp -a" to preserve storage-policy attributes the same > way it currently preserves ownership, permissions, timestamps, extended > attributes, and security context--a list that initially contained only > the ownership, permissions, and timestamps in the past, the others were > added over time. If not by default, then at least have the ability to > do it when requested with a "--preserve=datacow" switch. ... > The cp doc could be clearer that filesystems that support reflink > don't guarantee every file can be reflinked to every other file. > reflink is expected to fail in a growing number of cases over time, > as more filesystem features are created that are incompatible with it > (e.g. encryption, where reflinks between files with different owners could > be unimplementable). I've seen a number of users get burned by making big > --reflink=always copies and not checking the results for errors, assuming > that only lack of space for metadata could cause a reflink copy to fail. > There are good reasons why --reflink=auto exists and is the default, > and users ignore them at their peril. > Hello everyone, I made a similar thread[1] about a year ago on the coreutils mailing-list and I think it is also relevant to this bug-report. It is true as Zygo mentions, that reflinking nocow and cow files does not work, and cannot work due to the nature of how nocow works. What I would like to add to this bug-report is what elaborated on in the other thread, that we can move forward with preserving all attributes by setting them in the correct order. I show in the message that reflinking works between two nocow files and that ‘cp -a’ could preserve nocow and other attributes if ‘cp -a’ sets those attributes in correct order. As a normal end-user, IMHO, ‘cp -a’ should preserve all attributes where possible, which is also what the manual[2] currently states: ‘--archive’ Preserve as much as possible of the structure and attributes of the original files in the copy (but do not attempt to preserve internal directory structure; i.e., ‘ls -U’ may list the entries in a copied directory in a different order). Try to preserve SELinux security context and extended attributes (xattr), but ignore any failure to do that and print no corresponding diagnostic. Equivalent to -dR --preserve=all with the reduced diagnostics. Only when using --reflink=always, we should fail if the target cannot support reflinks. Thanks! ~A [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/coreutils/2021-06/msg00005.html that [2] https://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/manual/html_node/cp-invocation.html#cp-invocation