Re: [PATCH 1/2] iomap: support tail packing inline read
From: Gao Xiang <hidden>
Date: 2021-07-16 13:56:31
Also in:
lkml
Hi Matthew, On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 02:02:29PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 01:07:23PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:quoted
This tries to add tail packing inline read to iomap. Different from the previous approach, it only marks the block range uptodate in the page it covers.Why? This path is called under two circumstances: readahead and readpage. In both cases, we're trying to bring the entire page uptodate. The inline extent is always the tail of the file, so we may as well zero the part of the page past the end of file and mark the entire page uptodate instead and leaving the end of the page !uptodate. I see the case where, eg, we have the first 2048 bytes of the file out-of-inode and then 20 bytes in the inode. So we'll create the iop for the head of the file, but then we may as well finish the entire PAGE_SIZE chunk as part of this iteration rather than update 2048-3071 as being uptodate and leave the 3072-4095 block for a future iteration.
Thanks for your comments. Hmm... If I understand the words above correctly,
what I'd like to do is to cover the inline extents (blocks) only
reported by iomap_begin() rather than handling other (maybe)
logical-not-strictly-relevant areas such as post-EOF (even pages
will be finally entirely uptodated), I think such zeroed area should
be handled by from the point of view of the extent itself
if (iomap_block_needs_zeroing(inode, iomap, pos)) {
zero_user(page, poff, plen);
iomap_set_range_uptodate(page, poff, plen);
goto done;
}
The benefits I can think out are 1) it makes the logic understand
easier and no special cases just for tail-packing handling 2) it can
be then used for any inline extent cases (I mean e.g. in the middle of
the file) rather than just tail-packing inline blocks although currently
there is a BUG_ON to prevent this but it's easier to extend even further.
3) it can be used as a part for later partial page uptodate logic in
order to match the legacy buffer_head logic (I remember something if my
memory is not broken about this...)
Thanks,
Gao Xiang