Re: [V9fs-developer] [PATCH] fs/9p: don't set SB_NOATIME by default
On 2018/3/28 7:15, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 09:50:47 +0800 jiangyiwen wrote: > >> User use some syscall, for example mmap(v9fs_file_mmap), it will not >> update atime even if user's mnt_flags without MNT_NOATIME, because >> v9fs default set SB_NOATIME in v9fs_set_super. >> >> For supporting access time is updated when user mount with relatime, >> we should not set SB_NOATIME by default. >> >> ... >> >> --- a/fs/9p/vfs_super.c >> +++ b/fs/9p/vfs_super.c >> @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static int v9fs_set_super(struct super_block *s, void >> *data) >> if (v9ses->cache) >> sb->s_bdi->ra_pages = (VM_MAX_READAHEAD * 1024)/PAGE_SIZE; >> >> -sb->s_flags |= SB_ACTIVE | SB_DIRSYNC | SB_NOATIME; >> +sb->s_flags |= SB_ACTIVE | SB_DIRSYNC; >> if (!v9ses->cache) >> sb->s_flags |= SB_SYNCHRONOUS; >> > > So strictly speaking, this is a non-backward-compatible change, yes? > > Please describe the circumstances under which an existing user might be > harmed by this. I *think* such harm will occur if the user was already > using 'mount -o relatime', yes? They previously weren't getting > relatime treatment, but now they will, and things will be a little slower. > Yes, after using this change, if user was already using 'mount -o relatime', their atime will be changed, and some operations will result in slower performance, but I think user should use 'noatime' option if they hope their file's atime is not updated and user should not depend on the internal implement. > If correct, that sounds acceptable. > > . >
Re: [V9fs-developer] [PATCH] fs/9p: don't set SB_NOATIME by default
On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 09:50:47 +0800 jiangyiwen wrote: > User use some syscall, for example mmap(v9fs_file_mmap), it will not > update atime even if user's mnt_flags without MNT_NOATIME, because > v9fs default set SB_NOATIME in v9fs_set_super. > > For supporting access time is updated when user mount with relatime, > we should not set SB_NOATIME by default. > > ... > > --- a/fs/9p/vfs_super.c > +++ b/fs/9p/vfs_super.c > @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static int v9fs_set_super(struct super_block *s, void *data) > if (v9ses->cache) > sb->s_bdi->ra_pages = (VM_MAX_READAHEAD * 1024)/PAGE_SIZE; > > - sb->s_flags |= SB_ACTIVE | SB_DIRSYNC | SB_NOATIME; > + sb->s_flags |= SB_ACTIVE | SB_DIRSYNC; > if (!v9ses->cache) > sb->s_flags |= SB_SYNCHRONOUS; > So strictly speaking, this is a non-backward-compatible change, yes? Please describe the circumstances under which an existing user might be harmed by this. I *think* such harm will occur if the user was already using 'mount -o relatime', yes? They previously weren't getting relatime treatment, but now they will, and things will be a little slower. If correct, that sounds acceptable.
Re: [V9fs-developer] [PATCH] fs/9p: don't set SB_NOATIME by default
Hi, I think you would better to modify the subject line without [V9fs-developers]. On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 09:34:49AM +0800, jiangyiwen wrote: On 2018/2/24 10:47, jiangyiwen wrote: On 2018/2/9 14:13, jiangyiwen wrote: User use some syscall, for example mmap(v9fs_file_mmap), it will not update atime even if user's mnt_flags have MNT_NOATIME, because v9fs default set SB_NOATIME in v9fs_set_super. For supporting access time is updated when user mount with relatime, we should clear SB_NOATIME by default. Signed-off-by: Yiwen Jiang --- fs/9p/vfs_super.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/9p/vfs_super.c b/fs/9p/vfs_super.c index af03c2a..48ce504 100644 --- a/fs/9p/vfs_super.c +++ b/fs/9p/vfs_super.c @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static int v9fs_set_super(struct super_block *s, void *data) if (v9ses->cache) sb->s_bdi->ra_pages = (VM_MAX_READAHEAD * 1024)/PAGE_SIZE; - sb->s_flags |= SB_ACTIVE | SB_DIRSYNC | SB_NOATIME; + sb->s_flags |= SB_ACTIVE | SB_DIRSYNC; if (!v9ses->cache) sb->s_flags |= SB_SYNCHRONOUS; Hi Alexander Viro and Eric, My patch has already sent two weeks, but nobody help me to review, I have a question about now who is the v9fs's maintainer? Or who can help me review the patch? I hope v9fs's maintainer can give me some advices or merge into the mainline if it has no problem. Thanks, Yiwen. Hi Andrew, My patch has already sent more than two weeks, but nobody help me to review, I have a question about now who is the v9fs's maintainer? Or who can help me review the patch? There is no maintainer with V9fs in get_maintain.pl and V9fs git tree laterest commit before two years.so,situation become bad. Maybe you eamil linus directly,although this is't good I hope v9fs's maintainer can give me some advices or merge into the mainline if it has no problem. Thanks, Yiwen. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [V9fs-developer] [PATCH] fs/9p: don't set SB_NOATIME by default
On 2018/2/24 10:47, jiangyiwen wrote: > On 2018/2/9 14:13, jiangyiwen wrote: >> User use some syscall, for example mmap(v9fs_file_mmap), it will not >> update atime even if user's mnt_flags have MNT_NOATIME, because >> v9fs default set SB_NOATIME in v9fs_set_super. >> >> For supporting access time is updated when user mount with relatime, >> we should clear SB_NOATIME by default. >> >> Signed-off-by: Yiwen Jiang >> --- >> fs/9p/vfs_super.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/9p/vfs_super.c b/fs/9p/vfs_super.c >> index af03c2a..48ce504 100644 >> --- a/fs/9p/vfs_super.c >> +++ b/fs/9p/vfs_super.c >> @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static int v9fs_set_super(struct super_block *s, void >> *data) >> if (v9ses->cache) >> sb->s_bdi->ra_pages = (VM_MAX_READAHEAD * 1024)/PAGE_SIZE; >> >> -sb->s_flags |= SB_ACTIVE | SB_DIRSYNC | SB_NOATIME; >> +sb->s_flags |= SB_ACTIVE | SB_DIRSYNC; >> if (!v9ses->cache) >> sb->s_flags |= SB_SYNCHRONOUS; >> > Hi Alexander Viro and Eric, > > My patch has already sent two weeks, but nobody help me > to review, I have a question about now who is the v9fs's > maintainer? Or who can help me review the patch? > > I hope v9fs's maintainer can give me some advices or > merge into the mainline if it has no problem. > > Thanks, > Yiwen. > Hi Andrew, My patch has already sent more than two weeks, but nobody help me to review, I have a question about now who is the v9fs's maintainer? Or who can help me review the patch? I hope v9fs's maintainer can give me some advices or merge into the mainline if it has no problem. Thanks, Yiwen.
Re: [V9fs-developer] [PATCH] fs/9p: don't set SB_NOATIME by default
On 2018/2/9 14:13, jiangyiwen wrote: > User use some syscall, for example mmap(v9fs_file_mmap), it will not > update atime even if user's mnt_flags have MNT_NOATIME, because > v9fs default set SB_NOATIME in v9fs_set_super. > > For supporting access time is updated when user mount with relatime, > we should clear SB_NOATIME by default. > > Signed-off-by: Yiwen Jiang > --- > fs/9p/vfs_super.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/9p/vfs_super.c b/fs/9p/vfs_super.c > index af03c2a..48ce504 100644 > --- a/fs/9p/vfs_super.c > +++ b/fs/9p/vfs_super.c > @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static int v9fs_set_super(struct super_block *s, void *data) > if (v9ses->cache) > sb->s_bdi->ra_pages = (VM_MAX_READAHEAD * 1024)/PAGE_SIZE; > > - sb->s_flags |= SB_ACTIVE | SB_DIRSYNC | SB_NOATIME; > + sb->s_flags |= SB_ACTIVE | SB_DIRSYNC; > if (!v9ses->cache) > sb->s_flags |= SB_SYNCHRONOUS; > Hi Alexander Viro and Eric, My patch has already sent two weeks, but nobody help me to review, I have a question about now who is the v9fs's maintainer? Or who can help me review the patch? I hope v9fs's maintainer can give me some advices or merge into the mainline if it has no problem. Thanks, Yiwen.
