On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 07:37:25AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:

On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 08:17:18AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Dave Chinner [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:14:37PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:01 PM, Dave Chinner [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 09:32:13PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Dave Chinner [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 09:11:01PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 04:38:12PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

quoted

quoted

It would be better to write zeros to it, so we aren't measuring the
cost of the unwritten->written conversion.

At the risk of beating a dead horse, how hard would it be to defer
this part until writeback?

Part of the work has to be done at write time because we need to
update allocation statistics (i.e., so that we don't have ENOSPC
problems).  The unwritten->written conversion does happen at writeback
(as does the actual block allocation if we are doing delayed
allocation).

The point is that if the goal is to measure page fault scalability, we
shouldn't have this other stuff happening as the same time as the page
fault workload.

Sure, but the real problem is not the block mapping or allocation
path - even if the test is changed to take that out of the picture,
we still have timestamp updates being done on every single page
fault. ext4, XFS and btrfs all do transactional timestamp updates
and have nanosecond granularity, so every page fault is resulting in
a transaction to update the timestamp of the file being modified.

I have (unmergeable) patches to fix this:

http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/92476

The big problem with this approach is that not doing the
timestamp update on page faults is going to break the inode change
version counting because for ext4, btrfs and XFS it takes a
transaction to bump that counter. NFS needs to know the moment a
file is changed in memory, not when it is written to disk. Also, NFS
requires the change to the counter to be persistent over server
failures, so it needs to be changed as part of a transaction....

I've been running a kernel that has the file_update_time call
commented out for over a year now, and the only problem I've seen is
that the timestamp doesn't get updated :)

[...]

quoted

If a filesystem is providing an i_version value, then NFS uses it to
determine whether client side caches are still consistent with the
server state. If the filesystem does not provide an i_version, then
NFS falls back to checking c/mtime for changes. If files on the
server are being modified without either the tiemstamps or i_version
changing, then it's likely that there will be problems with client
side cache consistency....

I didn't think of that at all.

If userspace does:

ptr = mmap(...);
ptr[0] = 1;
sleep(1);
ptr[0] = 2;
sleep(1);
munmap();

Then current kernels will mark the inode changed on (only) the ptr[0]
= 1 line.  My patches will instead mark the inode changed when munmap
is called (or after ptr[0] = 2 if writepages gets called for any
reason).

I'm not sure which is better.  POSIX actually requires my behavior
(which is most irrelevant).

Not by my reading of it. Posix states that c/mtime needs to be
updated between the first access and the next msync() call. We
update mtime on the first access, and so therefore we conform to the
posix requirement....

quoted

My behavior also means that, if an NFS
client reads and caches the file between the two writes, then it will
eventually find out that the data is stale.

"eventually" is very different behaviour to the current behaviour.

My understanding is that NFS v4 delegations require the underlying
filesystem to bump the version count on *any* modification made to
the file so that delegations can be recalled appropriately.

Delegations at least shouldn't be an issue here: they're recalled on the
open.

--b.

So not
informing the filesystem that the file data has been changed is
going to cause problems.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs