From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3338FC433E0 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 07:03:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F003220775 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 07:03:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=javigon-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@javigon-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="hpKkLtzC" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726741AbgFZHDt (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jun 2020 03:03:49 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59252 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726557AbgFZHDs (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jun 2020 03:03:48 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x544.google.com (mail-ed1-x544.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::544]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F486C08C5DB for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 00:03:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x544.google.com with SMTP id b15so6094053edy.7 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 00:03:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=javigon-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=CI3FxrIl7lSns4541JWoWdk57zQMfx31FGFt5L4ayT8=; b=hpKkLtzCISaXM7UaRpk86PMZln2paDRk35L9s4Y+KtMylLwOgBcW3JGDz5rzP1BIJl joSwIHikA39AefxyGVN7nKmNbZVKT1OlK20Y6wbZXeFQuQXDggbSHVtVCAMESPjE5adW q207mt7UGT7ruQ0kSvRVzpc6f8A8IRYxMVrTb1djP6ac4NycqxIyKleGPKGb8b5SkBkC vVsqCGt3TurQwBlm29MfAToAQH8UFFO/miOtbV2gII5cHWxrsJUUnPjibGImxjL4SGwz 51hqhbzW1F9dXdiAhPP9HtiPUY3P0y1ZKwMx250fBprS8wW3zNXonhQWwbLIUfBhMoUM v08w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=CI3FxrIl7lSns4541JWoWdk57zQMfx31FGFt5L4ayT8=; b=oeflUNIHC2bpmMhlo1pv3pM2B1IWZOwD2isVBOW2tsqakuKHrBVbM8zrvpATLBg/ux LaCRL3FCMIkPirRqx6rjxgRofSeEYtpWM2rL2+BJWUoC/qGSoaENFTKr971asiIG4we+ lgp7vLkHQERdWQJogH/Y7V//gszTv9HL5asNXHUGJMrzDdjsg5CJw0VvTv86Sy61HHJ1 +cy+X+A8AckXf41aY939u6e7+qiOO96HM6r5K7zynM1/J3y86SrCsKJ7bZTszNFh2w0w 4QyUfuUk8VLCt74WbZ8PcZIpGD/RWZXzdfT+shweXdBhHLLsJ86CydUc26kdtI8k2QuY zaGg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ig+/zD/4V1qVE6jICYe0404tk0yqIw8TM4FrJcRzqrw86bVc1 x0KaoEta7i+0pN8LLRFHFiGP+A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwNmdcT4mE0xDF8Ewsq0DmM7hEeCyMu0hfp5z0TYSOGnGMsBcd7wFfw4gvuWGBSJSo1RdtqmA== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d4ca:: with SMTP id t10mr1921245edr.244.1593155027037; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 00:03:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ip-5-186-127-235.cgn.fibianet.dk. [5.186.127.235]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p4sm9756178eja.9.2020.06.26.00.03.46 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 26 Jun 2020 00:03:46 -0700 (PDT) From: "javier.gonz@samsung.com" X-Google-Original-From: "javier.gonz@samsung.com" Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 09:03:45 +0200 To: Damien Le Moal Cc: Kanchan Joshi , "axboe@kernel.dk" , "viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk" , "bcrl@kvack.org" , "asml.silence@gmail.com" , "hch@infradead.org" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "mb@lightnvm.io" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-aio@kvack.org" , "io-uring@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "selvakuma.s1@samsung.com" , "nj.shetty@samsung.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] zone-append support in io-uring and aio Message-ID: <20200626070345.vuxic46l3agy3jay@mpHalley.localdomain> References: <1593105349-19270-1-git-send-email-joshi.k@samsung.com> <20200626063717.4dhsydpcnezjhj3o@mpHalley.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: io-uring-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org On 26.06.2020 06:56, Damien Le Moal wrote: >On 2020/06/26 15:37, javier.gonz@samsung.com wrote: >> On 26.06.2020 03:11, Damien Le Moal wrote: >>> On 2020/06/26 2:18, Kanchan Joshi wrote: >>>> [Revised as per feedback from Damien, Pavel, Jens, Christoph, Matias, Wilcox] >>>> >>>> This patchset enables zone-append using io-uring/linux-aio, on block IO path. >>>> Purpose is to provide zone-append consumption ability to applications which are >>>> using zoned-block-device directly. >>>> >>>> The application may specify RWF_ZONE_APPEND flag with write when it wants to >>>> send zone-append. RWF_* flags work with a certain subset of APIs e.g. uring, >>>> aio, and pwritev2. An error is reported if zone-append is requested using >>>> pwritev2. It is not in the scope of this patchset to support pwritev2 or any >>>> other sync write API for reasons described later. >>>> >>>> Zone-append completion result ---> >>>> With zone-append, where write took place can only be known after completion. >>>> So apart from usual return value of write, additional mean is needed to obtain >>>> the actual written location. >>>> >>>> In aio, this is returned to application using res2 field of io_event - >>>> >>>> struct io_event { >>>> __u64 data; /* the data field from the iocb */ >>>> __u64 obj; /* what iocb this event came from */ >>>> __s64 res; /* result code for this event */ >>>> __s64 res2; /* secondary result */ >>>> }; >>>> >>>> In io-uring, cqe->flags is repurposed for zone-append result. >>>> >>>> struct io_uring_cqe { >>>> __u64 user_data; /* sqe->data submission passed back */ >>>> __s32 res; /* result code for this event */ >>>> __u32 flags; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> Since 32 bit flags is not sufficient, we choose to return zone-relative offset >>>> in sector/512b units. This can cover zone-size represented by chunk_sectors. >>>> Applications will have the trouble to combine this with zone start to know >>>> disk-relative offset. But if more bits are obtained by pulling from res field >>>> that too would compel application to interpret res field differently, and it >>>> seems more painstaking than the former option. >>>> To keep uniformity, even with aio, zone-relative offset is returned. >>> >>> I am really not a fan of this, to say the least. The input is byte offset, the >>> output is 512B relative sector count... Arg... We really cannot do better than >>> that ? >>> >>> At the very least, byte relative offset ? The main reason is that this is >>> _somewhat_ acceptable for raw block device accesses since the "sector" >>> abstraction has a clear meaning, but once we add iomap/zonefs async zone append >>> support, we really will want to have byte unit as the interface is regular >>> files, not block device file. We could argue that 512B sector unit is still >>> around even for files (e.g. block counts in file stat). Bu the different unit >>> for input and output of one operation is really ugly. This is not nice for the user. >>> >> >> You can refer to the discussion with Jens, Pavel and Alex on the uring >> interface. With the bits we have and considering the maximun zone size >> supported, there is no space for a byte relative offset. We can take >> some bits from cqe->res, but we were afraid this is not very >> future-proof. Do you have a better idea? > >If you can take 8 bits, that gives you 40 bits, enough to support byte relative >offsets for any zone size defined as a number of 512B sectors using an unsigned >int. Max zone size is 2^31 sectors in that case, so 2^40 bytes. Unless I am >already too tired and my math is failing me... Yes, the match is correct. I was thinking more of the bits being needed for other use-case that could collide with append. We considered this and discard it for being messy - when Pavel brought up the 512B alignment we saw it as a good alternative. Note too that we would be able to translate to a byte offset in iouring.h too so the user would not need to think of this. I do not feel strongly on this, so the one that better fits the current and near-future for uring, that is the one we will send on V3. Will give it until next week for others to comment too. > >zone size is defined by chunk_sectors, which is used for raid and software raids >too. This has been an unsigned int forever. I do not see the need for changing >this to a 64bit anytime soon, if ever. A raid with a stripe size larger than 1TB >does not really make any sense. Same for zone size... Yes. I think already max zone sizes are pretty huge. But yes, this might change, so we will take it when it happens. [...] Javier