linux/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c

1791 lines
56 KiB

drbd: introduce P_ZEROES (REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES on the "wire") And also re-enable partial-zero-out + discard aligned. With the introduction of REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES, we started to use that for both WRITE_ZEROES and DISCARDS, hoping that WRITE_ZEROES would "do what we want", UNMAP if possible, zero-out the rest. The example scenario is some LVM "thin" backend. While an un-allocated block on dm-thin reads as zeroes, on a dm-thin with "skip_block_zeroing=true", after a partial block write allocated that block, that same block may well map "undefined old garbage" from the backends on LBAs that have not yet been written to. If we cannot distinguish between zero-out and discard on the receiving side, to avoid "undefined old garbage" to pop up randomly at later times on supposedly zero-initialized blocks, we'd need to map all discards to zero-out on the receiving side. But that would potentially do a full alloc on thinly provisioned backends, even when the expectation was to unmap/trim/discard/de-allocate. We need to distinguish on the protocol level, whether we need to guarantee zeroes (and thus use zero-out, potentially doing the mentioned full-alloc), or if we want to put the emphasis on discard, and only do a "best effort zeroing" (by "discarding" blocks aligned to discard-granularity, and zeroing only potential unaligned head and tail clippings to at least *try* to avoid "false positives" in an online-verify later), hoping that someone set skip_block_zeroing=false. For some discussion regarding this on dm-devel, see also https://www.mail-archive.com/dm-devel%40redhat.com/msg07965.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2018-January/msg00271.html For backward compatibility, P_TRIM means zero-out, unless the DRBD_FF_WZEROES feature flag is agreed upon during handshake. To have upper layers even try to submit WRITE ZEROES requests, we need to announce "efficient zeroout" independently. We need to fixup max_write_zeroes_sectors after blk_queue_stack_limits(): if we can handle "zeroes" efficiently on the protocol, we want to do that, even if our backend does not announce max_write_zeroes_sectors itself. Signed-off-by: Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@linbit.com> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
2018-12-20 17:23:42 +01:00
block: Abstract out bvec iterator Immutable biovecs are going to require an explicit iterator. To implement immutable bvecs, a later patch is going to add a bi_bvec_done member to this struct; for now, this patch effectively just renames things. Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <kmo@daterainc.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> Cc: "Ed L. Cashin" <ecashin@coraid.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> Cc: Lars Ellenberg <drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com> Cc: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com> Cc: Geoff Levand <geoff@infradead.org> Cc: Yehuda Sadeh <yehuda@inktank.com> Cc: Sage Weil <sage@inktank.com> Cc: Alex Elder <elder@inktank.com> Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Joshua Morris <josh.h.morris@us.ibm.com> Cc: Philip Kelleher <pjk1939@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de> Cc: Alasdair Kergon <agk@redhat.com> Cc: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> Cc: dm-devel@redhat.com Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> Cc: linux390@de.ibm.com Cc: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com> Cc: Benny Halevy <bhalevy@tonian.com> Cc: "James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@parallels.com> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Cc: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com> Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu> Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca> Cc: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk.kim@samsung.com> Cc: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com> Cc: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@kernel.org> Cc: Joern Engel <joern@logfs.org> Cc: Prasad Joshi <prasadjoshi.linux@gmail.com> Cc: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com> Cc: KONISHI Ryusuke <konishi.ryusuke@lab.ntt.co.jp> Cc: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.com> Cc: Joel Becker <jlbec@evilplan.org> Cc: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com> Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com> Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl> Cc: Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski <herton.krzesinski@canonical.com> Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Guo Chao <yan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Asai Thambi S P <asamymuthupa@micron.com> Cc: Selvan Mani <smani@micron.com> Cc: Sam Bradshaw <sbradshaw@micron.com> Cc: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@trendmicro.com.cn> Cc: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com> Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> Cc: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> Cc: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> Cc: Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> Cc: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@huawei.com> Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org> Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchand@redhat.com> Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> Cc: Peng Tao <tao.peng@emc.com> Cc: Andy Adamson <andros@netapp.com> Cc: fanchaoting <fanchaoting@cn.fujitsu.com> Cc: Jie Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com> Cc: Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@gmail.com> Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com> Cc: Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@samsung.com> Cc: Pankaj Kumar <pankaj.km@samsung.com> Cc: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>6
2013-10-11 15:44:27 -07:00
drbd: introduce P_ZEROES (REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES on the "wire") And also re-enable partial-zero-out + discard aligned. With the introduction of REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES, we started to use that for both WRITE_ZEROES and DISCARDS, hoping that WRITE_ZEROES would "do what we want", UNMAP if possible, zero-out the rest. The example scenario is some LVM "thin" backend. While an un-allocated block on dm-thin reads as zeroes, on a dm-thin with "skip_block_zeroing=true", after a partial block write allocated that block, that same block may well map "undefined old garbage" from the backends on LBAs that have not yet been written to. If we cannot distinguish between zero-out and discard on the receiving side, to avoid "undefined old garbage" to pop up randomly at later times on supposedly zero-initialized blocks, we'd need to map all discards to zero-out on the receiving side. But that would potentially do a full alloc on thinly provisioned backends, even when the expectation was to unmap/trim/discard/de-allocate. We need to distinguish on the protocol level, whether we need to guarantee zeroes (and thus use zero-out, potentially doing the mentioned full-alloc), or if we want to put the emphasis on discard, and only do a "best effort zeroing" (by "discarding" blocks aligned to discard-granularity, and zeroing only potential unaligned head and tail clippings to at least *try* to avoid "false positives" in an online-verify later), hoping that someone set skip_block_zeroing=false. For some discussion regarding this on dm-devel, see also https://www.mail-archive.com/dm-devel%40redhat.com/msg07965.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2018-January/msg00271.html For backward compatibility, P_TRIM means zero-out, unless the DRBD_FF_WZEROES feature flag is agreed upon during handshake. To have upper layers even try to submit WRITE ZEROES requests, we need to announce "efficient zeroout" independently. We need to fixup max_write_zeroes_sectors after blk_queue_stack_limits(): if we can handle "zeroes" efficiently on the protocol, we want to do that, even if our backend does not announce max_write_zeroes_sectors itself. Signed-off-by: Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@linbit.com> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
2018-12-20 17:23:42 +01:00
drbd: introduce P_ZEROES (REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES on the "wire") And also re-enable partial-zero-out + discard aligned. With the introduction of REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES, we started to use that for both WRITE_ZEROES and DISCARDS, hoping that WRITE_ZEROES would "do what we want", UNMAP if possible, zero-out the rest. The example scenario is some LVM "thin" backend. While an un-allocated block on dm-thin reads as zeroes, on a dm-thin with "skip_block_zeroing=true", after a partial block write allocated that block, that same block may well map "undefined old garbage" from the backends on LBAs that have not yet been written to. If we cannot distinguish between zero-out and discard on the receiving side, to avoid "undefined old garbage" to pop up randomly at later times on supposedly zero-initialized blocks, we'd need to map all discards to zero-out on the receiving side. But that would potentially do a full alloc on thinly provisioned backends, even when the expectation was to unmap/trim/discard/de-allocate. We need to distinguish on the protocol level, whether we need to guarantee zeroes (and thus use zero-out, potentially doing the mentioned full-alloc), or if we want to put the emphasis on discard, and only do a "best effort zeroing" (by "discarding" blocks aligned to discard-granularity, and zeroing only potential unaligned head and tail clippings to at least *try* to avoid "false positives" in an online-verify later), hoping that someone set skip_block_zeroing=false. For some discussion regarding this on dm-devel, see also https://www.mail-archive.com/dm-devel%40redhat.com/msg07965.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2018-January/msg00271.html For backward compatibility, P_TRIM means zero-out, unless the DRBD_FF_WZEROES feature flag is agreed upon during handshake. To have upper layers even try to submit WRITE ZEROES requests, we need to announce "efficient zeroout" independently. We need to fixup max_write_zeroes_sectors after blk_queue_stack_limits(): if we can handle "zeroes" efficiently on the protocol, we want to do that, even if our backend does not announce max_write_zeroes_sectors itself. Signed-off-by: Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@linbit.com> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
2018-12-20 17:23:42 +01:00
drbd: introduce P_ZEROES (REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES on the "wire") And also re-enable partial-zero-out + discard aligned. With the introduction of REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES, we started to use that for both WRITE_ZEROES and DISCARDS, hoping that WRITE_ZEROES would "do what we want", UNMAP if possible, zero-out the rest. The example scenario is some LVM "thin" backend. While an un-allocated block on dm-thin reads as zeroes, on a dm-thin with "skip_block_zeroing=true", after a partial block write allocated that block, that same block may well map "undefined old garbage" from the backends on LBAs that have not yet been written to. If we cannot distinguish between zero-out and discard on the receiving side, to avoid "undefined old garbage" to pop up randomly at later times on supposedly zero-initialized blocks, we'd need to map all discards to zero-out on the receiving side. But that would potentially do a full alloc on thinly provisioned backends, even when the expectation was to unmap/trim/discard/de-allocate. We need to distinguish on the protocol level, whether we need to guarantee zeroes (and thus use zero-out, potentially doing the mentioned full-alloc), or if we want to put the emphasis on discard, and only do a "best effort zeroing" (by "discarding" blocks aligned to discard-granularity, and zeroing only potential unaligned head and tail clippings to at least *try* to avoid "false positives" in an online-verify later), hoping that someone set skip_block_zeroing=false. For some discussion regarding this on dm-devel, see also https://www.mail-archive.com/dm-devel%40redhat.com/msg07965.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2018-January/msg00271.html For backward compatibility, P_TRIM means zero-out, unless the DRBD_FF_WZEROES feature flag is agreed upon during handshake. To have upper layers even try to submit WRITE ZEROES requests, we need to announce "efficient zeroout" independently. We need to fixup max_write_zeroes_sectors after blk_queue_stack_limits(): if we can handle "zeroes" efficiently on the protocol, we want to do that, even if our backend does not announce max_write_zeroes_sectors itself. Signed-off-by: Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@linbit.com> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
2018-12-20 17:23:42 +01:00
2016-06-14 00:26:27 +02:00
2016-06-14 00:26:27 +02:00
block: make generic_make_request handle arbitrarily sized bios The way the block layer is currently written, it goes to great lengths to avoid having to split bios; upper layer code (such as bio_add_page()) checks what the underlying device can handle and tries to always create bios that don't need to be split. But this approach becomes unwieldy and eventually breaks down with stacked devices and devices with dynamic limits, and it adds a lot of complexity. If the block layer could split bios as needed, we could eliminate a lot of complexity elsewhere - particularly in stacked drivers. Code that creates bios can then create whatever size bios are convenient, and more importantly stacked drivers don't have to deal with both their own bio size limitations and the limitations of the (potentially multiple) devices underneath them. In the future this will let us delete merge_bvec_fn and a bunch of other code. We do this by adding calls to blk_queue_split() to the various make_request functions that need it - a few can already handle arbitrary size bios. Note that we add the call _after_ any call to blk_queue_bounce(); this means that blk_queue_split() and blk_recalc_rq_segments() don't need to be concerned with bouncing affecting segment merging. Some make_request_fn() callbacks were simple enough to audit and verify they don't need blk_queue_split() calls. The skipped ones are: * nfhd_make_request (arch/m68k/emu/nfblock.c) * axon_ram_make_request (arch/powerpc/sysdev/axonram.c) * simdisk_make_request (arch/xtensa/platforms/iss/simdisk.c) * brd_make_request (ramdisk - drivers/block/brd.c) * mtip_submit_request (drivers/block/mtip32xx/mtip32xx.c) * loop_make_request * null_queue_bio * bcache's make_request fns Some others are almost certainly safe to remove now, but will be left for future patches. Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com> Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de> Cc: Alasdair Kergon <agk@redhat.com> Cc: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> Cc: dm-devel@redhat.com Cc: Lars Ellenberg <drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com> Cc: drbd-user@lists.linbit.com Cc: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz> Cc: Geoff Levand <geoff@infradead.org> Cc: Jim Paris <jim@jtan.com> Cc: Philip Kelleher <pjk1939@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org> Cc: Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@intel.com> Cc: Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@intel.com> Acked-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> (for the 'md/md.c' bits) Acked-by: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com> [dpark: skip more mq-based drivers, resolve merge conflicts, etc.] Signed-off-by: Dongsu Park <dpark@posteo.net> Signed-off-by: Ming Lin <ming.l@ssi.samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
2015-04-23 22:37:18 -07:00