Remove the recently-added LINUX_FADV_ASYNC_WRITE and LINUX_FADV_WRITE_WAIT
fadvise() additions, do it in a new sys_sync_file_range() syscall instead.
Reasons:
- It's more flexible. Things which would require two or three syscalls with
fadvise() can be done in a single syscall.
- Using fadvise() in this manner is something not covered by POSIX.
The patch wires up the syscall for x86.
The sycall is implemented in the new fs/sync.c. The intention is that we can
move sys_fsync(), sys_fdatasync() and perhaps sys_sync() into there later.
Documentation for the syscall is in fs/sync.c.
A test app (sync_file_range.c) is in
http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/ext3-tools.tar.gz.
The available-to-GPL-modules do_sync_file_range() is for knfsd: "A COMMIT can
say NFS_DATA_SYNC or NFS_FILE_SYNC. I can skip the ->fsync call for
NFS_DATA_SYNC which is hopefully the more common."
Note: the `async' writeout mode SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WRITE will turn synchronous if
the queue is congested. This is trivial to fix: add a new flag bit, set
wbc->nonblocking. But I'm not sure that we want to expose implementation
details down to that level.
Note: it's notable that we can sync an fd which wasn't opened for writing.
Same with fsync() and fdatasync()).
Note: the code takes some care to handle attempts to sync file contents
outside the 16TB offset on 32-bit machines. It makes such attempts appear to
succeed, for best 32-bit/64-bit compatibility. Perhaps it should make such
requests fail...
Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: Michael Kerrisk <mtk-manpages@gmx.net>
Cc: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>
Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Add two new linux-specific fadvise extensions():
LINUX_FADV_ASYNC_WRITE: start async writeout of any dirty pages between file
offsets `offset' and `offset+len'. Any pages which are currently under
writeout are skipped, whether or not they are dirty.
LINUX_FADV_WRITE_WAIT: wait upon writeout of any dirty pages between file
offsets `offset' and `offset+len'.
By combining these two operations the application may do several things:
LINUX_FADV_ASYNC_WRITE: push some or all of the dirty pages at the disk.
LINUX_FADV_WRITE_WAIT, LINUX_FADV_ASYNC_WRITE: push all of the currently dirty
pages at the disk.
LINUX_FADV_WRITE_WAIT, LINUX_FADV_ASYNC_WRITE, LINUX_FADV_WRITE_WAIT: push all
of the currently dirty pages at the disk, wait until they have been written.
It should be noted that none of these operations write out the file's
metadata. So unless the application is strictly performing overwrites of
already-instantiated disk blocks, there are no guarantees here that the data
will be available after a crash.
To complete this suite of operations I guess we should have a "sync file
metadata only" operation. This gives applications access to all the building
blocks needed for all sorts of sync operations. But sync-metadata doesn't fit
well with the fadvise() interface. Probably it should be a new syscall:
sys_fmetadatasync().
The patch also diddles with the meaning of `endbyte' in sys_fadvise64_64().
It is made to represent that last affected byte in the file (ie: it is
inclusive). Generally, all these byterange and pagerange functions are
inclusive so we can easily represent EOF with -1.
As Ulrich notes, these two functions are somewhat abusive of the fadvise()
concept, which appears to be "set the future policy for this fd".
But these commands are a perfect fit with the fadvise() impementation, and
several of the existing fadvise() commands are synchronous and don't affect
future policy either. I think we can live with the slight incongruity.
Cc: Michael Kerrisk <mtk-manpages@gmx.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
The patch makes posix_fadvise return ESPIPE on FIFO/pipe in order to be
fully POSIX-compliant.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
infrastructure for it.
Let it rip!
Andrew Morton