Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2023 08:35:52 -0700 From: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> To: Rick Macklem <rick.macklem@gmail.com> Cc: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>, Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>, Martin Matuska <mm@freebsd.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org, dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org Subject: Re: git: 8ee579abe09e - main - zfs: fall back if block_cloning feature is disabled Message-ID: <20230404153552.F063F27A@slippy.cwsent.com> In-Reply-To: <CAM5tNy6sPx4xE%2BcAeeC_RQG_tba_K6Yh-Cni0%2B-WxJ5SXCuO9A@mail.gmail.com> References: <202304041145.334Bjx6l035872@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <20230404141717.B976D31C@slippy.cwsent.com> <CAGudoHEvGDUQkYe8LwUXgTZZa%2B6DAFXVtspCX-Mn2egDO2oc_w@mail.gmail.com> <CAM5tNy6sPx4xE%2BcAeeC_RQG_tba_K6Yh-Cni0%2B-WxJ5SXCuO9A@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <CAM5tNy6sPx4xE+cAeeC_RQG_tba_K6Yh-Cni0+-WxJ5SXCuO9A@mail.gmail.c om> , Rick Macklem writes: > On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 7:38=E2=80=AFAM Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> wr= > ote: > > > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Guelph. = > Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and = > know the content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails to IThelp@= > uoguelph.ca > > > > > > On 4/4/23, Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> wrote: > > > In message <202304041145.334Bjx6l035872@gitrepo.freebsd.org>, Martin > > > Matuska wr > > > ites: > > >> The branch main has been updated by mm: > > >> > > >> URL: > > >> https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=3D8ee579abe09ec1fe15c588fc9a08= > 370b > > >> 83b81cd6 > > >> > > >> commit 8ee579abe09ec1fe15c588fc9a08370b83b81cd6 > > >> Author: Martin Matuska <mm@FreeBSD.org> > > >> AuthorDate: 2023-04-04 11:40:41 +0000 > > >> Commit: Martin Matuska <mm@FreeBSD.org> > > >> CommitDate: 2023-04-04 11:43:34 +0000 > > >> > > >> zfs: fall back if block_cloning feature is disabled > > >> > > >> If block_cloning is disabled, or other errors from zfs_clone_range= > () > > >> return an EXDEV we should fall back to vn_generic_copy_file_range(= > ). > > >> > > >> This fixes issues when copying files on the same dataset with > > >> block_cloning disabled. > > >> > > >> Upstreamed as pull request to OpenZFS. > > >> > > >> Reviewed by: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> > > >> OpenZFS pull request: 14713 > > >> --- > > >> .../openzfs/module/os/freebsd/zfs/zfs_vnops_os.c | 17 > > >> ++++++++++----- > > >> -- > > >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > >> > > >> diff --git a/sys/contrib/openzfs/module/os/freebsd/zfs/zfs_vnops_os.c > > >> b/sys/c > > >> ontrib/openzfs/module/os/freebsd/zfs/zfs_vnops_os.c > > >> index 97429b360a36..2cd1d27e37bc 100644 > > >> --- a/sys/contrib/openzfs/module/os/freebsd/zfs/zfs_vnops_os.c > > >> +++ b/sys/contrib/openzfs/module/os/freebsd/zfs/zfs_vnops_os.c > > >> @@ -6243,13 +6243,6 @@ zfs_freebsd_copy_file_range(struct > > >> vop_copy_file_range > > >> _args *ap) > > >> int error; > > >> uint64_t len =3D *ap->a_lenp; > > >> > > >> - /* > > >> - * TODO: If offset/length is not aligned to recordsize, use > > >> - * vn_generic_copy_file_range() on this fragment. > > >> - * It would be better to do this after we lock the vnodes, but th= > en we > > >> - * need something else than vn_generic_copy_file_range(). > > >> - */ > > >> - > > >> /* Lock both vnodes, avoiding risk of deadlock. */ > > >> do { > > >> mp =3D NULL; > > >> @@ -6300,6 +6293,16 @@ unlock: > > >> if (mp !=3D NULL) > > >> vn_finished_write(mp); > > >> > > >> + /* > > >> + * Fall back if block_cloning feature is disabled > > >> + * or other EXDEV failures from zfs_vnops.c > > >> + */ > > >> + if (error =3D=3D EXDEV) { > > >> + error =3D vn_generic_copy_file_range(ap->a_invp, ap->a_in= > offp, > > >> + ap->a_outvp, ap->a_outoffp, ap->a_lenp, ap->a= > _flags > > >> , > > >> + ap->a_incred, ap->a_outcred, ap->a_fsizetd); > > >> + } > > >> + > > >> return (error); > > >> } > > >> > > >> > > > > > > This is too late to fall back. On Rick's suggestion the following makes= > the > > > > > > determination at > > > zfs_freebsd_copy_file_range() entry much earlier. > > > > > > > It's not too late, but I agree it is faster to bail out early. > > > > The proposed patch adds a condition which *differs* from the one in > > zfs_clone_range: > > if (dmu_objset_spa(inos) !=3D dmu_objset_spa(outos)) { > > zfs_exit_two(inzfsvfs, outzfsvfs, FTAG); > > return (SET_ERROR(EXDEV)); > > } > > > > ... meaning with the proposed patch the routine can still fail with > > EXDEV, making zfs_freebsd_copy_file_range also do it, which must not > > happen. > Since VOP_COPY_FILE_RANGE() is only called when invp and outvp > are on the same mount point, I don't think this can happen now. > However, there is a TO DO comment that suggests a call with invp and > outvp on different mount points may be in the future. > > As such, leaving Martin's patch in so that it calls vn_generic_copy_file_ra= > nge() > when zfs_clone_range() returns EXDEV seems like a good idea to me. It would need to be a few lines earlier, within the locked block. [...] -- Cheers, Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> FreeBSD UNIX: <cy@FreeBSD.org> Web: https://FreeBSD.org NTP: <cy@nwtime.org> Web: https://nwtime.org e^(i*pi)+1=0
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20230404153552.F063F27A>