Hi,

On 31/07/17 12:27, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Thu, 2017-07-27 at 08:48 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Thu, 2017-07-27 at 10:49 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
On Wed 26-07-17 13:55:36, Jeff Layton wrote:
+int file_write_and_wait(struct file *file)
+{
+       int err = 0, err2;
+       struct address_space *mapping = file->f_mapping;
+
+       if ((!dax_mapping(mapping) && mapping->nrpages) ||
+           (dax_mapping(mapping) && mapping->nrexceptional)) {
+               err = filemap_fdatawrite(mapping);
+               /* See comment of filemap_write_and_wait() */
+               if (err != -EIO) {
+                       loff_t i_size = i_size_read(mapping->host);
+
+                       if (i_size != 0)
+                               __filemap_fdatawait_range(mapping, 0,
+                                                         i_size - 1);
+               }
+       }
Err, what's the i_size check doing here? I'd just pass ~0 as the end of the
range and ignore i_size. It is much easier than trying to wrap your head
around possible races with file operations modifying i_size.

                                                                Honza
I'm basically emulating _exactly_ what filemap_write_and_wait does here,
as I'm leery of making subtle behavior changes in the actual writeback
behavior. For example:

-----------------8<----------------
static inline int __filemap_fdatawrite(struct address_space *mapping,
         int sync_mode)
{
         return __filemap_fdatawrite_range(mapping, 0, LLONG_MAX, sync_mode);
}

int filemap_fdatawrite(struct address_space *mapping)
{
         return __filemap_fdatawrite(mapping, WB_SYNC_ALL);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(filemap_fdatawrite);
-----------------8<----------------

...which then sets up the wbc with the right ranges and sync mode and
kicks off writepages. But then, it does the i_size_read to figure out
what range it should wait on (with the shortcut for the size == 0 case).

My assumption was that it was intentionally designed that way, but I'm
guessing from your comments that it wasn't? If so, then we can turn
file_write_and_wait a static inline wrapper around
file_write_and_wait_range.
FWIW, I did a bit of archaeology in the linux-history tree and found
this patch from Marcelo in 2004. Is this optimization still helpful? If
not, then that does simplify the code a bit.

-------------------8<--------------------

[PATCH] small wait_on_page_writeback_range() optimization

filemap_fdatawait() calls wait_on_page_writeback_range() with -1 as "end"
parameter.  This is not needed since we know the EOF from the inode.  Use
that instead.

Signed-off-by: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosa...@cyclades.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <a...@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torva...@osdl.org>
---
  mm/filemap.c | 8 +++++++-
  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
index 78e18b7639b6..55fb7b4141e4 100644
--- a/mm/filemap.c
+++ b/mm/filemap.c
@@ -287,7 +287,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(sync_page_range);
   */
  int filemap_fdatawait(struct address_space *mapping)
  {
-       return wait_on_page_writeback_range(mapping, 0, -1);
+       loff_t i_size = i_size_read(mapping->host);
+
+       if (i_size == 0)
+               return 0;
+
+       return wait_on_page_writeback_range(mapping, 0,
+                               (i_size - 1) >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT);
  }
  EXPORT_SYMBOL(filemap_fdatawait);


Does this ever get called in cases where we would not hold fs locks? In that case we definitely don't want to be relying on i_size,

Steve.

Reply via email to