Re: [PATCH 2/2] block: enable zone-append for iov_iter of bvec type

2020-07-03 Thread Johannes Thumshirn
On 03/07/2020 08:56, Kanchan Joshi wrote:
[...]
> Yes, zonefs does not use bvec iter. But while enabling io-uring path for
> zone-append, I hit into this condition returning -EINVAL. 
> 
> Reference (from user zone-append series cover letter):
> "Append using io_uring fixed-buffer --->
> This is flagged as not-supported at the moment. Reason being, for fixed-buffer
> io-uring sends iov_iter of bvec type. But current append-infra in block-layer
> does not support such iov_iter."
> 
> And zone-append doesn't have a problem in using bvec iter as well, so
> thought that this may make infra more complete/future-proof?

As long as it's no problem for current in-tree users please keep it as is. 
Please submit this patch together with your io_uring series as a preparatory 
patch.


Re: [PATCH 2/2] block: enable zone-append for iov_iter of bvec type

2020-07-03 Thread Damien Le Moal
On 2020/07/03 15:56, Kanchan Joshi wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 03, 2020 at 05:32:56AM +, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> On 2020/07/03 0:42, Kanchan Joshi wrote:
>>> zone-append with bvec iov_iter gives WARN_ON, and returns -EINVAL.
>>> Add new helper to process such iov_iter and add pages in bio honoring
>>> zone-append specific constraints.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kanchan Joshi 
>>> Signed-off-by: Selvakumar S 
>>> Signed-off-by: Nitesh Shetty 
>>> Signed-off-by: Javier Gonzalez 
>>> ---
>>>  block/bio.c | 31 ---
>>>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/block/bio.c b/block/bio.c
>>> index 0cecdbc..ade9da7 100644
>>> --- a/block/bio.c
>>> +++ b/block/bio.c
>>> @@ -975,6 +975,30 @@ static int __bio_iov_bvec_add_pages(struct bio *bio, 
>>> struct iov_iter *iter)
>>> iov_iter_advance(iter, size);
>>> return 0;
>>>  }
>>> +static int __bio_iov_bvec_append_add_pages(struct bio *bio, struct 
>>> iov_iter *iter)
>>> +{
>>> +   const struct bio_vec *bv = iter->bvec;
>>> +   unsigned int len;
>>> +   size_t size;
>>> +   struct request_queue *q = bio->bi_disk->queue;
>>> +   unsigned int max_append_sectors = queue_max_zone_append_sectors(q);
>>> +   bool same_page = false;
>>> +
>>> +   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!max_append_sectors))
>>> +   return -EINVAL;
>>> +
>>> +   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(iter->iov_offset > bv->bv_len))
>>> +   return -EINVAL;
>>> +
>>> +   len = min_t(size_t, bv->bv_len - iter->iov_offset, iter->count);
>>> +   size = bio_add_hw_page(q, bio, bv->bv_page, len,
>>> +   bv->bv_offset + iter->iov_offset,
>>> +   max_append_sectors, &same_page);
>>> +   if (unlikely(size != len))
>>> +   return -EINVAL;
>>> +   iov_iter_advance(iter, size);
>>> +   return 0;
>>> +}
>>>
>>>  #define PAGE_PTRS_PER_BVEC (sizeof(struct bio_vec) / sizeof(struct 
>>> page *))
>>>
>>> @@ -1105,9 +1129,10 @@ int bio_iov_iter_get_pages(struct bio *bio, struct 
>>> iov_iter *iter)
>>>
>>> do {
>>> if (bio_op(bio) == REQ_OP_ZONE_APPEND) {
>>> -   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(is_bvec))
>>> -   return -EINVAL;
>>> -   ret = __bio_iov_append_get_pages(bio, iter);
>>> +   if (is_bvec)
>>> +   ret = __bio_iov_bvec_append_add_pages(bio, 
>>> iter);
>>> +   else
>>> +   ret = __bio_iov_append_get_pages(bio, iter);
>>> } else {
>>> if (is_bvec)
>>> ret = __bio_iov_bvec_add_pages(bio, iter);
>>>
>>
>> The only user of this function that issues zone append requests is zonefs. 
>> The
>> issued requests are not using bvec iter but a user direct IO buffer iter. So
>> this change would have no user at all as far as I can see. Am I missing
>> something ? What IO path makes this change necessary ?
> 
> Yes, zonefs does not use bvec iter. But while enabling io-uring path for
> zone-append, I hit into this condition returning -EINVAL. 
> 
> Reference (from user zone-append series cover letter):
> "Append using io_uring fixed-buffer --->
> This is flagged as not-supported at the moment. Reason being, for fixed-buffer
> io-uring sends iov_iter of bvec type. But current append-infra in block-layer
> does not support such iov_iter."
> 
> And zone-append doesn't have a problem in using bvec iter as well, so
> thought that this may make infra more complete/future-proof?

As long as there is no possible user for this change, I do not see the point in
adding it.


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research


Re: [PATCH 2/2] block: enable zone-append for iov_iter of bvec type

2020-07-02 Thread Kanchan Joshi

On Fri, Jul 03, 2020 at 05:32:56AM +, Damien Le Moal wrote:

On 2020/07/03 0:42, Kanchan Joshi wrote:

zone-append with bvec iov_iter gives WARN_ON, and returns -EINVAL.
Add new helper to process such iov_iter and add pages in bio honoring
zone-append specific constraints.

Signed-off-by: Kanchan Joshi 
Signed-off-by: Selvakumar S 
Signed-off-by: Nitesh Shetty 
Signed-off-by: Javier Gonzalez 
---
 block/bio.c | 31 ---
 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/bio.c b/block/bio.c
index 0cecdbc..ade9da7 100644
--- a/block/bio.c
+++ b/block/bio.c
@@ -975,6 +975,30 @@ static int __bio_iov_bvec_add_pages(struct bio *bio, 
struct iov_iter *iter)
iov_iter_advance(iter, size);
return 0;
 }
+static int __bio_iov_bvec_append_add_pages(struct bio *bio, struct iov_iter 
*iter)
+{
+   const struct bio_vec *bv = iter->bvec;
+   unsigned int len;
+   size_t size;
+   struct request_queue *q = bio->bi_disk->queue;
+   unsigned int max_append_sectors = queue_max_zone_append_sectors(q);
+   bool same_page = false;
+
+   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!max_append_sectors))
+   return -EINVAL;
+
+   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(iter->iov_offset > bv->bv_len))
+   return -EINVAL;
+
+   len = min_t(size_t, bv->bv_len - iter->iov_offset, iter->count);
+   size = bio_add_hw_page(q, bio, bv->bv_page, len,
+   bv->bv_offset + iter->iov_offset,
+   max_append_sectors, &same_page);
+   if (unlikely(size != len))
+   return -EINVAL;
+   iov_iter_advance(iter, size);
+   return 0;
+}

 #define PAGE_PTRS_PER_BVEC (sizeof(struct bio_vec) / sizeof(struct page *))

@@ -1105,9 +1129,10 @@ int bio_iov_iter_get_pages(struct bio *bio, struct 
iov_iter *iter)

do {
if (bio_op(bio) == REQ_OP_ZONE_APPEND) {
-   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(is_bvec))
-   return -EINVAL;
-   ret = __bio_iov_append_get_pages(bio, iter);
+   if (is_bvec)
+   ret = __bio_iov_bvec_append_add_pages(bio, 
iter);
+   else
+   ret = __bio_iov_append_get_pages(bio, iter);
} else {
if (is_bvec)
ret = __bio_iov_bvec_add_pages(bio, iter);



The only user of this function that issues zone append requests is zonefs. The
issued requests are not using bvec iter but a user direct IO buffer iter. So
this change would have no user at all as far as I can see. Am I missing
something ? What IO path makes this change necessary ?


Yes, zonefs does not use bvec iter. But while enabling io-uring path for
zone-append, I hit into this condition returning -EINVAL. 


Reference (from user zone-append series cover letter):
"Append using io_uring fixed-buffer --->
This is flagged as not-supported at the moment. Reason being, for fixed-buffer
io-uring sends iov_iter of bvec type. But current append-infra in block-layer
does not support such iov_iter."

And zone-append doesn't have a problem in using bvec iter as well, so
thought that this may make infra more complete/future-proof?


--
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research



Re: [PATCH 2/2] block: enable zone-append for iov_iter of bvec type

2020-07-02 Thread Damien Le Moal
On 2020/07/03 0:42, Kanchan Joshi wrote:
> zone-append with bvec iov_iter gives WARN_ON, and returns -EINVAL.
> Add new helper to process such iov_iter and add pages in bio honoring
> zone-append specific constraints.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kanchan Joshi 
> Signed-off-by: Selvakumar S 
> Signed-off-by: Nitesh Shetty 
> Signed-off-by: Javier Gonzalez 
> ---
>  block/bio.c | 31 ---
>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block/bio.c b/block/bio.c
> index 0cecdbc..ade9da7 100644
> --- a/block/bio.c
> +++ b/block/bio.c
> @@ -975,6 +975,30 @@ static int __bio_iov_bvec_add_pages(struct bio *bio, 
> struct iov_iter *iter)
>   iov_iter_advance(iter, size);
>   return 0;
>  }
> +static int __bio_iov_bvec_append_add_pages(struct bio *bio, struct iov_iter 
> *iter)
> +{
> + const struct bio_vec *bv = iter->bvec;
> + unsigned int len;
> + size_t size;
> + struct request_queue *q = bio->bi_disk->queue;
> + unsigned int max_append_sectors = queue_max_zone_append_sectors(q);
> + bool same_page = false;
> +
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!max_append_sectors))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(iter->iov_offset > bv->bv_len))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + len = min_t(size_t, bv->bv_len - iter->iov_offset, iter->count);
> + size = bio_add_hw_page(q, bio, bv->bv_page, len,
> + bv->bv_offset + iter->iov_offset,
> + max_append_sectors, &same_page);
> + if (unlikely(size != len))
> + return -EINVAL;
> + iov_iter_advance(iter, size);
> + return 0;
> +}
>  
>  #define PAGE_PTRS_PER_BVEC (sizeof(struct bio_vec) / sizeof(struct page 
> *))
>  
> @@ -1105,9 +1129,10 @@ int bio_iov_iter_get_pages(struct bio *bio, struct 
> iov_iter *iter)
>  
>   do {
>   if (bio_op(bio) == REQ_OP_ZONE_APPEND) {
> - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(is_bvec))
> - return -EINVAL;
> - ret = __bio_iov_append_get_pages(bio, iter);
> + if (is_bvec)
> + ret = __bio_iov_bvec_append_add_pages(bio, 
> iter);
> + else
> + ret = __bio_iov_append_get_pages(bio, iter);
>   } else {
>   if (is_bvec)
>   ret = __bio_iov_bvec_add_pages(bio, iter);
> 

The only user of this function that issues zone append requests is zonefs. The
issued requests are not using bvec iter but a user direct IO buffer iter. So
this change would have no user at all as far as I can see. Am I missing
something ? What IO path makes this change necessary ?


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research


[PATCH 2/2] block: enable zone-append for iov_iter of bvec type

2020-07-02 Thread Kanchan Joshi
zone-append with bvec iov_iter gives WARN_ON, and returns -EINVAL.
Add new helper to process such iov_iter and add pages in bio honoring
zone-append specific constraints.

Signed-off-by: Kanchan Joshi 
Signed-off-by: Selvakumar S 
Signed-off-by: Nitesh Shetty 
Signed-off-by: Javier Gonzalez 
---
 block/bio.c | 31 ---
 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/bio.c b/block/bio.c
index 0cecdbc..ade9da7 100644
--- a/block/bio.c
+++ b/block/bio.c
@@ -975,6 +975,30 @@ static int __bio_iov_bvec_add_pages(struct bio *bio, 
struct iov_iter *iter)
iov_iter_advance(iter, size);
return 0;
 }
+static int __bio_iov_bvec_append_add_pages(struct bio *bio, struct iov_iter 
*iter)
+{
+   const struct bio_vec *bv = iter->bvec;
+   unsigned int len;
+   size_t size;
+   struct request_queue *q = bio->bi_disk->queue;
+   unsigned int max_append_sectors = queue_max_zone_append_sectors(q);
+   bool same_page = false;
+
+   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!max_append_sectors))
+   return -EINVAL;
+
+   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(iter->iov_offset > bv->bv_len))
+   return -EINVAL;
+
+   len = min_t(size_t, bv->bv_len - iter->iov_offset, iter->count);
+   size = bio_add_hw_page(q, bio, bv->bv_page, len,
+   bv->bv_offset + iter->iov_offset,
+   max_append_sectors, &same_page);
+   if (unlikely(size != len))
+   return -EINVAL;
+   iov_iter_advance(iter, size);
+   return 0;
+}
 
 #define PAGE_PTRS_PER_BVEC (sizeof(struct bio_vec) / sizeof(struct page *))
 
@@ -1105,9 +1129,10 @@ int bio_iov_iter_get_pages(struct bio *bio, struct 
iov_iter *iter)
 
do {
if (bio_op(bio) == REQ_OP_ZONE_APPEND) {
-   if (WARN_ON_ONCE(is_bvec))
-   return -EINVAL;
-   ret = __bio_iov_append_get_pages(bio, iter);
+   if (is_bvec)
+   ret = __bio_iov_bvec_append_add_pages(bio, 
iter);
+   else
+   ret = __bio_iov_append_get_pages(bio, iter);
} else {
if (is_bvec)
ret = __bio_iov_bvec_add_pages(bio, iter);
-- 
2.7.4