Chen Yang
2013-Jan-23 11:04 UTC
[PATCH] Btrfs-progs/receive: sparse and pre-allocated file support, for btrfs-send mechanism
From: Chen Yang <chenyang.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:54:31 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs/receive: sparse and pre-allocated file support
for btrfs-send mechanism
When sending a file with sparse or pre-allocated part,
these parts will be sent as ZERO streams, and it''s unnecessary.
To improve this, we add a punch command on the sending side, so the
receiving side changed with it. The main change is adding the punch
processing to receive command.
Signed-off-by: Cheng Yang <chenyang.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
cmds-receive.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
send-stream.c | 6 ++++++
send-stream.h | 1 +
send.h | 3 ++-
4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cmds-receive.c b/cmds-receive.c
index a8be6fa..74cbfc4 100644
--- a/cmds-receive.c
+++ b/cmds-receive.c
@@ -37,6 +37,7 @@
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/xattr.h>
#include <uuid/uuid.h>
+#include <linux/falloc.h>
#include "ctree.h"
#include "ioctl.h"
@@ -508,6 +509,31 @@ out:
return ret;
}
+static int process_punch(const char *path, u64 offset, u64 len, void *user)
+{
+ int ret = 0;
+ struct btrfs_receive *r = user;
+ char *full_path = path_cat(r->full_subvol_path, path);
+
+ ret = open_inode_for_write(r, full_path);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ goto out;
+
+ ret = fallocate(r->write_fd,
+ FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE | FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE,
+ offset, len);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ ret = -errno;
+ fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: punch %s failed. %s\n",
+ path, strerror(-ret));
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+out:
+ free(full_path);
+ return ret;
+}
+
static int process_write(const char *path, const void *data, u64 offset,
u64 len, void *user)
{
@@ -777,6 +803,7 @@ struct btrfs_send_ops send_ops = {
.link = process_link,
.unlink = process_unlink,
.rmdir = process_rmdir,
+ .punch = process_punch,
.write = process_write,
.clone = process_clone,
.set_xattr = process_set_xattr,
diff --git a/send-stream.c b/send-stream.c
index 55fa728..9f3ede7 100644
--- a/send-stream.c
+++ b/send-stream.c
@@ -362,6 +362,12 @@ static int read_and_process_cmd(struct btrfs_send_stream
*s)
TLV_GET_STRING(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_PATH, &path);
ret = s->ops->rmdir(path, s->user);
break;
+ case BTRFS_SEND_C_PUNCH:
+ TLV_GET_STRING(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_PATH, &path);
+ TLV_GET_U64(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_FILE_OFFSET, &offset);
+ TLV_GET_U64(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_SIZE, &len);
+ ret = s->ops->punch(path, offset, len, s->user);
+ break;
case BTRFS_SEND_C_WRITE:
TLV_GET_STRING(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_PATH, &path);
TLV_GET_U64(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_FILE_OFFSET, &offset);
diff --git a/send-stream.h b/send-stream.h
index b69b7f1..f83f2ac 100644
--- a/send-stream.h
+++ b/send-stream.h
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ struct btrfs_send_ops {
int (*link)(const char *path, const char *lnk, void *user);
int (*unlink)(const char *path, void *user);
int (*rmdir)(const char *path, void *user);
+ int (*punch)(const char *path, u64 offset, u64 len, void *user);
int (*write)(const char *path, const void *data, u64 offset, u64 len,
void *user);
int (*clone)(const char *path, u64 offset, u64 len,
diff --git a/send.h b/send.h
index 9934e94..10a88d2 100644
--- a/send.h
+++ b/send.h
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
#include "ctree.h"
#define BTRFS_SEND_STREAM_MAGIC "btrfs-stream"
-#define BTRFS_SEND_STREAM_VERSION 1
+#define BTRFS_SEND_STREAM_VERSION 2
#define BTRFS_SEND_BUF_SIZE (1024 * 64)
#define BTRFS_SEND_READ_SIZE (1024 * 48)
@@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ enum btrfs_send_cmd {
BTRFS_SEND_C_WRITE,
BTRFS_SEND_C_CLONE,
+ BTRFS_SEND_C_PUNCH,
BTRFS_SEND_C_TRUNCATE,
BTRFS_SEND_C_CHMOD,
BTRFS_SEND_C_CHOWN,
--
1.7.7.6
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Alex Lyakas
2013-Jan-23 11:58 UTC
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs/receive: sparse and pre-allocated file support, for btrfs-send mechanism
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Chen Yang <chenyang.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:> From: Chen Yang <chenyang.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:54:31 +0800 > Subject: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs/receive: sparse and pre-allocated file support > for btrfs-send mechanism > > When sending a file with sparse or pre-allocated part, > these parts will be sent as ZERO streams, and it''s unnecessary. > > To improve this, we add a punch command on the sending side, so the > receiving side changed with it. The main change is adding the punch > processing to receive command. > > Signed-off-by: Cheng Yang <chenyang.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > --- > cmds-receive.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > send-stream.c | 6 ++++++ > send-stream.h | 1 + > send.h | 3 ++- > 4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/cmds-receive.c b/cmds-receive.c > index a8be6fa..74cbfc4 100644 > --- a/cmds-receive.c > +++ b/cmds-receive.c > @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ > #include <sys/types.h> > #include <sys/xattr.h> > #include <uuid/uuid.h> > +#include <linux/falloc.h> > > #include "ctree.h" > #include "ioctl.h" > @@ -508,6 +509,31 @@ out: > return ret; > } > > +static int process_punch(const char *path, u64 offset, u64 len, void *user) > +{ > + int ret = 0; > + struct btrfs_receive *r = user; > + char *full_path = path_cat(r->full_subvol_path, path); > + > + ret = open_inode_for_write(r, full_path); > + if (ret < 0) > + goto out; > + > + ret = fallocate(r->write_fd, > + FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE | FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE, > + offset, len); > + if (ret < 0) { > + ret = -errno; > + fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: punch %s failed. %s\n", > + path, strerror(-ret)); > + goto out; > + } > + > +out: > + free(full_path); > + return ret; > +} > + > static int process_write(const char *path, const void *data, u64 offset, > u64 len, void *user) > { > @@ -777,6 +803,7 @@ struct btrfs_send_ops send_ops = { > .link = process_link, > .unlink = process_unlink, > .rmdir = process_rmdir, > + .punch = process_punch, > .write = process_write, > .clone = process_clone, > .set_xattr = process_set_xattr, > diff --git a/send-stream.c b/send-stream.c > index 55fa728..9f3ede7 100644 > --- a/send-stream.c > +++ b/send-stream.c > @@ -362,6 +362,12 @@ static int read_and_process_cmd(struct btrfs_send_stream *s) > TLV_GET_STRING(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_PATH, &path); > ret = s->ops->rmdir(path, s->user); > break; > + case BTRFS_SEND_C_PUNCH: > + TLV_GET_STRING(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_PATH, &path); > + TLV_GET_U64(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_FILE_OFFSET, &offset); > + TLV_GET_U64(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_SIZE, &len); > + ret = s->ops->punch(path, offset, len, s->user); > + break; > case BTRFS_SEND_C_WRITE: > TLV_GET_STRING(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_PATH, &path); > TLV_GET_U64(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_FILE_OFFSET, &offset); > diff --git a/send-stream.h b/send-stream.h > index b69b7f1..f83f2ac 100644 > --- a/send-stream.h > +++ b/send-stream.h > @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ struct btrfs_send_ops { > int (*link)(const char *path, const char *lnk, void *user); > int (*unlink)(const char *path, void *user); > int (*rmdir)(const char *path, void *user); > + int (*punch)(const char *path, u64 offset, u64 len, void *user); > int (*write)(const char *path, const void *data, u64 offset, u64 len, > void *user); > int (*clone)(const char *path, u64 offset, u64 len, > diff --git a/send.h b/send.h > index 9934e94..10a88d2 100644 > --- a/send.h > +++ b/send.h > @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ > #include "ctree.h" > > #define BTRFS_SEND_STREAM_MAGIC "btrfs-stream" > -#define BTRFS_SEND_STREAM_VERSION 1 > +#define BTRFS_SEND_STREAM_VERSION 2 > > #define BTRFS_SEND_BUF_SIZE (1024 * 64) > #define BTRFS_SEND_READ_SIZE (1024 * 48) > @@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ enum btrfs_send_cmd { > BTRFS_SEND_C_WRITE, > BTRFS_SEND_C_CLONE, > > + BTRFS_SEND_C_PUNCH, > BTRFS_SEND_C_TRUNCATE, > BTRFS_SEND_C_CHMOD, > BTRFS_SEND_C_CHOWN,I think this breaks the current protocol, because it changes the numbers for existing commands, starting from BTRFS_SEND_C_TRUNCATE. I don''t think this will be acceptable for existing users. I think the new commands should be added after BTRFS_SEND_C_END command (unfortunately), like the snapper command that was added recently. Thanks, Alex.> -- > 1.7.7.6 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
David Sterba
2013-Jan-23 15:46 UTC
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs/receive: sparse and pre-allocated file support, for btrfs-send mechanism
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 07:04:33PM +0800, Chen Yang wrote:> When sending a file with sparse or pre-allocated part, > these parts will be sent as ZERO streams, and it''s unnecessary. > > To improve this, we add a punch command on the sending side, so the > receiving side changed with it. The main change is adding the punch > processing to receive command. > > +static int process_punch(const char *path, u64 offset, u64 len, void *user) > +{ > + int ret = 0; > + struct btrfs_receive *r = user; > + char *full_path = path_cat(r->full_subvol_path, path); > + > + ret = open_inode_for_write(r, full_path); > + if (ret < 0) > + goto out; > + > + ret = fallocate(r->write_fd, > + FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE | FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE, > + offset, len);This unnecessarily fails if PUNCH_HOLE is not supported by the kernel version, some sort of fallback should be applied.> + if (ret < 0) { > + ret = -errno; > + fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: punch %s failed. %s\n", > + path, strerror(-ret)); > + goto out; > + } > + > +out: > + free(full_path); > + return ret; > +}david -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Alex Lyakas
2013-Jan-24 09:03 UTC
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs/receive: sparse and pre-allocated file support, for btrfs-send mechanism
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 3:51 AM, Chen Yang <chenyang.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Chen Yang <chenyang.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote: >>> From: Chen Yang <chenyang.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> >>> Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:54:31 +0800 >>> Subject: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs/receive: sparse and pre-allocated file support >>> for btrfs-send mechanism >>> >>> When sending a file with sparse or pre-allocated part, >>> these parts will be sent as ZERO streams, and it''s unnecessary. >>> >>> To improve this, we add a punch command on the sending side, so the >>> receiving side changed with it. The main change is adding the punch >>> processing to receive command. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Cheng Yang <chenyang.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> >>> --- >>> cmds-receive.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> send-stream.c | 6 ++++++ >>> send-stream.h | 1 + >>> send.h | 3 ++- >>> 4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/cmds-receive.c b/cmds-receive.c >>> index a8be6fa..74cbfc4 100644 >>> --- a/cmds-receive.c >>> +++ b/cmds-receive.c >>> @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ >>> #include <sys/types.h> >>> #include <sys/xattr.h> >>> #include <uuid/uuid.h> >>> +#include <linux/falloc.h> >>> >>> #include "ctree.h" >>> #include "ioctl.h" >>> @@ -508,6 +509,31 @@ out: >>> return ret; >>> } >>> >>> +static int process_punch(const char *path, u64 offset, u64 len, void *user) >>> +{ >>> + int ret = 0; >>> + struct btrfs_receive *r = user; >>> + char *full_path = path_cat(r->full_subvol_path, path); >>> + >>> + ret = open_inode_for_write(r, full_path); >>> + if (ret < 0) >>> + goto out; >>> + >>> + ret = fallocate(r->write_fd, >>> + FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE | FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE, >>> + offset, len); >>> + if (ret < 0) { >>> + ret = -errno; >>> + fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: punch %s failed. %s\n", >>> + path, strerror(-ret)); >>> + goto out; >>> + } >>> + >>> +out: >>> + free(full_path); >>> + return ret; >>> +} >>> + >>> static int process_write(const char *path, const void *data, u64 offset, >>> u64 len, void *user) >>> { >>> @@ -777,6 +803,7 @@ struct btrfs_send_ops send_ops = { >>> .link = process_link, >>> .unlink = process_unlink, >>> .rmdir = process_rmdir, >>> + .punch = process_punch, >>> .write = process_write, >>> .clone = process_clone, >>> .set_xattr = process_set_xattr, >>> diff --git a/send-stream.c b/send-stream.c >>> index 55fa728..9f3ede7 100644 >>> --- a/send-stream.c >>> +++ b/send-stream.c >>> @@ -362,6 +362,12 @@ static int read_and_process_cmd(struct btrfs_send_stream *s) >>> TLV_GET_STRING(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_PATH, &path); >>> ret = s->ops->rmdir(path, s->user); >>> break; >>> + case BTRFS_SEND_C_PUNCH: >>> + TLV_GET_STRING(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_PATH, &path); >>> + TLV_GET_U64(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_FILE_OFFSET, &offset); >>> + TLV_GET_U64(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_SIZE, &len); >>> + ret = s->ops->punch(path, offset, len, s->user); >>> + break; >>> case BTRFS_SEND_C_WRITE: >>> TLV_GET_STRING(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_PATH, &path); >>> TLV_GET_U64(s, BTRFS_SEND_A_FILE_OFFSET, &offset); >>> diff --git a/send-stream.h b/send-stream.h >>> index b69b7f1..f83f2ac 100644 >>> --- a/send-stream.h >>> +++ b/send-stream.h >>> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ struct btrfs_send_ops { >>> int (*link)(const char *path, const char *lnk, void *user); >>> int (*unlink)(const char *path, void *user); >>> int (*rmdir)(const char *path, void *user); >>> + int (*punch)(const char *path, u64 offset, u64 len, void *user); >>> int (*write)(const char *path, const void *data, u64 offset, u64 len, >>> void *user); >>> int (*clone)(const char *path, u64 offset, u64 len, >>> diff --git a/send.h b/send.h >>> index 9934e94..10a88d2 100644 >>> --- a/send.h >>> +++ b/send.h >>> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ >>> #include "ctree.h" >>> >>> #define BTRFS_SEND_STREAM_MAGIC "btrfs-stream" >>> -#define BTRFS_SEND_STREAM_VERSION 1 >>> +#define BTRFS_SEND_STREAM_VERSION 2 >>> >>> #define BTRFS_SEND_BUF_SIZE (1024 * 64) >>> #define BTRFS_SEND_READ_SIZE (1024 * 48) >>> @@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ enum btrfs_send_cmd { >>> BTRFS_SEND_C_WRITE, >>> BTRFS_SEND_C_CLONE, >>> >>> + BTRFS_SEND_C_PUNCH, >>> BTRFS_SEND_C_TRUNCATE, >>> BTRFS_SEND_C_CHMOD, >>> BTRFS_SEND_C_CHOWN, >> >> I think this breaks the current protocol, because it changes the >> numbers for existing commands, starting from BTRFS_SEND_C_TRUNCATE. I >> don''t think this will be acceptable for existing users. >> I think the new commands should be added after BTRFS_SEND_C_END >> command (unfortunately), like the snapper command that was added >> recently. > > yes, I agree with you and I thought it''s better to add the command > after BTRFS_SEND_C_END command. But BTRFS_SEND_C_END seem like more special?Yes, it''s kind of special, but still we cannot change the numbers for existing commands. If you add a new command, then users with an older user-space and newer kernel will receive a clear (hopefully) error about unsupported command. So they can go and upgrade the user-space tool. (Although looking at the code, they will not receive any error message, but instead the tool will exit silently returning a non-zero code. This is also pretty bad.) If you change the numbers of existing commands, users will start receiving error messages like "ERROR: attribute 15 requested but not present", and will need to start figuring out what user-code matches what kernel-code. Thanks, Alex.> > Thanks, > Chen. > >> >> Thanks, >> Alex. >> >> >>> -- >>> 1.7.7.6 >>> >>> -- >>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in >>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> >-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html