[Virtio-fs] [PATCH v4 1/2] virtiofsd: Track mounts
Greg Kurz
groug at kaod.org
Thu Jan 27 11:42:48 UTC 2022
On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 18:02:46 -0500
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 05:47:09PM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 03:12:11PM +0100, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > > The upcoming implementation of ->sync_fs() needs to know about all
> > > submounts in order to call syncfs() on them when virtiofsd is started
> > > without '-o announce_submounts'.
> > >
> > > Track every inode that comes up with a new mount id in a GHashTable.
> > > If the mount id isn't available, e.g. no statx() on the host, fallback
> > > on the device id for the key. This is done during lookup because we
> > > only care for the submounts that the client knows about. The inode
> > > is removed from the hash table when ultimately unreferenced. This
> > > can happen on a per-mount basis when the client posts a FUSE_FORGET
> > > request or for all submounts at once with FUSE_DESTROY.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <groug at kaod.org>
> > > ---
> > > tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > > 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c b/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c
> > > index 64b5b4fbb186..7bf31fc129c8 100644
> > > --- a/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c
> > > +++ b/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c
> > > @@ -117,6 +117,7 @@ struct lo_inode {
> > > GHashTable *posix_locks; /* protected by lo_inode->plock_mutex */
> > >
> > > mode_t filetype;
> > > + bool is_mnt;
> > > };
> > >
> > > struct lo_cred {
> > > @@ -164,6 +165,7 @@ struct lo_data {
> > > bool use_statx;
> > > struct lo_inode root;
> > > GHashTable *inodes; /* protected by lo->mutex */
> > > + GHashTable *mnt_inodes; /* protected by lo->mutex */
> > > struct lo_map ino_map; /* protected by lo->mutex */
> > > struct lo_map dirp_map; /* protected by lo->mutex */
> > > struct lo_map fd_map; /* protected by lo->mutex */
> > > @@ -1000,6 +1002,31 @@ static int do_statx(struct lo_data *lo, int dirfd, const char *pathname,
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > >
> >
> > Hi Greg,
> >
> > Thanks for the patches. Had a quick look. Overall these patches look
> > pretty good to me. I will spend more time testing and having a
> > closer look. Some quick thoughts below.
> >
> > > +static uint64_t mnt_inode_key(struct lo_inode *inode)
> > > +{
> > > + /* Prefer mnt_id, fallback on dev */
> > > + return inode->key.mnt_id ? inode->key.mnt_id : inode->key.dev;
> > > +}
> >
> > I am not sure if we should use inode->key.dev. This might create problem
> > if same file system is bind mounted at two paths in shared dir. So
> > say /dev/sdb is mounted at foo1/ and then bind mounted at foo2/ in
> > shared dir. A user looks up foo1/ and does some writes. Then we
> > lookup foo2/ and release that inode. Release of foo2 will let go
> > inode from the hash. And that means if later another write happens
> > in foo1/ followed by syncfs(), we will not issue syncfs() on filesystem
> > backed by /dev/sdb.
> >
> > So what are the options.
> >
> > A. Make mnt_id mandatory and do not implement it if mnt_id is not
> > available.
> >
> > B. Don't do anything and live with this. It is a corner case and
> > still better than not implement submount syncfs at all.
> >
> > C. Instead of adding lo_inode to hash, create another kind of object
> > and reference count that. It could be a mount fd which we open
> > when we add object for the first time. So when foo1/ inode is
> > instantiated, create mountfd object, add it to hash table using
> > device id as the key. When foo2 comes along, we find the object
> > in the hash and just bump up the ref. Now this mountfd object
> > will go away when both foo1 and foo2 inodes have been evicted
> > and will take care of the issue I am referring to.
>
> And we could take a ref on mountfd object only when we find an
> inode whose parent's device id/mnt_id is different from us. That
> way for every inode in the system we don't go through this exercise.
> Just only those dir inodes which are a mount point.
>
Good idea !
> Vivek
>
> >
> > I guess B is little extra complexity but probably not too bad.
> > WDYT. It sounds litter better than option A and B.
> >
> >
> > > +
> > > +static void add_mnt_inode(struct lo_data *lo, struct lo_inode *inode)
> > > +{
> > > + uint64_t mnt_key = mnt_inode_key(inode);
> > > +
> > > + if (!g_hash_table_contains(lo->mnt_inodes, &mnt_key)) {
> > > + inode->is_mnt = true;
> > > + g_hash_table_insert(lo->mnt_inodes, &mnt_key, inode);
> > > + }
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static void remove_mnt_inode(struct lo_data *lo, struct lo_inode *inode)
> > > +{
> > > + uint64_t mnt_key = mnt_inode_key(inode);
> > > +
> > > + if (inode->is_mnt) {
> > > + g_hash_table_remove(lo->mnt_inodes, &mnt_key);
> > > + }
> > > +}
> >
> > Should we issue syncfs() on this inode when we are removing it? It
> > is possible guest did some writes, let go inode and later issued
> > a syncfs(). By that time inode is gone and we will not issue any
> > syncfs() on this filesystem. Hence leaving data in host page cache.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Vivek
> >
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * Increments nlookup on the inode on success. unref_inode_lolocked() must be
> > > * called eventually to decrement nlookup again. If inodep is non-NULL, the
> > > @@ -1086,10 +1113,15 @@ static int lo_do_lookup(fuse_req_t req, fuse_ino_t parent, const char *name,
> > > pthread_mutex_lock(&lo->mutex);
> > > inode->fuse_ino = lo_add_inode_mapping(req, inode);
> > > g_hash_table_insert(lo->inodes, &inode->key, inode);
> > > + add_mnt_inode(lo, inode);
> > > pthread_mutex_unlock(&lo->mutex);
> > > }
> > > e->ino = inode->fuse_ino;
> > >
> > > + fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_DEBUG, " %lli/%s -> %lli%s\n",
> > > + (unsigned long long) parent, name, (unsigned long long) e->ino,
> > > + inode->is_mnt ? " (submount)" : "");
> > > +
> > > /* Transfer ownership of inode pointer to caller or drop it */
> > > if (inodep) {
> > > *inodep = inode;
> > > @@ -1099,9 +1131,6 @@ static int lo_do_lookup(fuse_req_t req, fuse_ino_t parent, const char *name,
> > >
> > > lo_inode_put(lo, &dir);
> > >
> > > - fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_DEBUG, " %lli/%s -> %lli\n", (unsigned long long)parent,
> > > - name, (unsigned long long)e->ino);
> > > -
> > > return 0;
> > >
> > > out_err:
> > > @@ -1563,6 +1592,7 @@ static void unref_inode(struct lo_data *lo, struct lo_inode *inode, uint64_t n)
> > > g_hash_table_destroy(inode->posix_locks);
> > > pthread_mutex_destroy(&inode->plock_mutex);
> > > }
> > > + remove_mnt_inode(lo, inode);
> > > /* Drop our refcount from lo_do_lookup() */
> > > lo_inode_put(lo, &inode);
> > > }
> > > @@ -3337,6 +3367,7 @@ static void lo_destroy(void *userdata)
> > > struct lo_data *lo = (struct lo_data *)userdata;
> > >
> > > pthread_mutex_lock(&lo->mutex);
> > > + g_hash_table_remove_all(lo->mnt_inodes);
> > > while (true) {
> > > GHashTableIter iter;
> > > gpointer key, value;
> > > @@ -3850,6 +3881,7 @@ static void setup_root(struct lo_data *lo, struct lo_inode *root)
> > > root->posix_locks = g_hash_table_new_full(
> > > g_direct_hash, g_direct_equal, NULL, posix_locks_value_destroy);
> > > }
> > > + add_mnt_inode(lo, root);
> > > }
> > >
> > > static guint lo_key_hash(gconstpointer key)
> > > @@ -3869,6 +3901,10 @@ static gboolean lo_key_equal(gconstpointer a, gconstpointer b)
> > >
> > > static void fuse_lo_data_cleanup(struct lo_data *lo)
> > > {
> > > + if (lo->mnt_inodes) {
> > > + g_hash_table_destroy(lo->mnt_inodes);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > if (lo->inodes) {
> > > g_hash_table_destroy(lo->inodes);
> > > }
> > > @@ -3931,6 +3967,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> > > lo.root.fd = -1;
> > > lo.root.fuse_ino = FUSE_ROOT_ID;
> > > lo.cache = CACHE_AUTO;
> > > + lo.mnt_inodes = g_hash_table_new(g_int64_hash, g_int64_equal);
> > >
> > > /*
> > > * Set up the ino map like this:
> > > --
> > > 2.34.1
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Virtio-fs mailing list
> > Virtio-fs at redhat.com
> > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virtio-fs
> >
>
More information about the Virtio-fs
mailing list