From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Wed Sep 23 14:56:24 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB76E3FC613 for ; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 14:56:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from kib.kiev.ua (kib.kiev.ua [IPv6:2001:470:d5e7:1::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BxLpv6SWTz3SmK for ; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 14:56:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from tom.home (kib@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kib.kiev.ua (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPS id 08NEuFDm058211 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 23 Sep 2020 17:56:18 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 kib.kiev.ua 08NEuFDm058211 Received: (from kostik@localhost) by tom.home (8.16.1/8.16.1/Submit) id 08NEuFZ6058210; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 17:56:15 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) X-Authentication-Warning: tom.home: kostik set sender to kostikbel@gmail.com using -f Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 17:56:15 +0300 From: Konstantin Belousov To: Alexander Leidinger Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: copy_file_range(3) Message-ID: <20200923145615.GH2570@kib.kiev.ua> References: <20200923122401.Horde.uXmEqpCzVbCyXTuyukZeRwU@webmail.leidinger.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200923122401.Horde.uXmEqpCzVbCyXTuyukZeRwU@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,FREEMAIL_FROM, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on tom.home X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4BxLpv6SWTz3SmK X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=softfail (mx1.freebsd.org: 2001:470:d5e7:1::1 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of kostikbel@gmail.com) smtp.mailfrom=kostikbel@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.83 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; DMARC_POLICY_SOFTFAIL(0.10)[gmail.com : No valid SPF, No valid DKIM,none]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.46)[0.457]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; R_SPF_SOFTFAIL(0.00)[~all:c]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.37)[0.370]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.00)[0.001]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:6939, ipnet:2001:470::/32, country:US]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-hackers]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 14:56:24 -0000 On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:24:01PM +0200, Alexander Leidinger via freebsd-hackers wrote: > Quoting Rick Macklem (from Wed, 23 Sep 2020 01:18:18 > +0000): > > > Well, I ran some quick benchmarks using the attached programs, plus "cp" both > > before and with your copy_file_range() patch. > > copya - Does what I think your plan is above, with a limit of 2Mbytes > > for "len". > > copyb -Just uses copy_file_range() with 128Mbytes for "len". > > > > I first created the sparse file with createsparse.c. It is admittedly a > > worst case, > > creating alternating holes and data blocks of the minimum size supported by > > the file system. (I ran it on a UFS file system created with defaults, > > so the minimum > > hole size is 32Kbytes.) > > Not related to the topic of changing cp, but related to the topic of > copy_file_range: does nullfs support (as in pass-through to the underlying > FS) copy_file_range? Nullfs bypasses VOP_COPY_FILE_RANGE() same as any other multi-vp arg VOP. What makes you think it is different ?