Thread (86 messages) 86 messages, 8 authors, 2021-10-22

Re: [PATCH 00/67] fscache: Rewrite index API and management system

From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Date: 2021-10-21 23:43:39
Also in: ceph-devel, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, linux-nfs, lkml

On Thu, 2021-10-21 at 18:15 -0500, Steve French wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 5:21 PM Omar Sandoval [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 03:50:15PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
However, with the advent of the tmpfile capacity in the VFS, an opportunity
arises to do invalidation much more easily, without having to wait for I/O
that's actually in progress: Cachefiles can simply cut over its file
pointer for the backing object attached to a cookie and abandon the
in-progress I/O, dismissing it upon completion.
Have changes been made to O_TMPFILE?  It is problematic for network filesystems
because it is not an atomic operation, and would be great if it were possible
to create a tmpfile and open it atomically (at the file system level).

Currently it results in creating a tmpfile (which results in
opencreate then close)
immediately followed by reopening the tmpfile which is somewhat counter to
the whole idea of a tmpfile (ie that it is deleted when closed) since
the syscall results
in two opens ie open(create)/close/open/close
In this case, O_TMPFILE is being used on the cachefiles backing store,
and that usually isn't deployed on a netfs. That said, Steve does have a
good point...

What happens if you do end up without O_TMPFILE support on the backing
store? Probably just opting to not cache in that case is fine. Does
cachefiles just shut down in that situation?
-- 
Jeff Layton [off-list ref]
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help