Btrfs-progs/receive: sparse and pre-allocated file support, for btrfs-send mechanism

PATCH In review Chen Yang 3 participants 4 messages Jan 23, 2013 – Jan 24, 2013 2 messages not in the archive Btrfs file system

lore

Share & tools

lore

Chen Yang

author

2013-01-23 11:05 UTC #1 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 Btrfs-progs/receive: sparse and pre-allocated file support, for btrfs-send mechanism

In reply to a message not in the archive

From: Chen Yang <[email protected]>
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 <[email protected]>

---
 cmds-receive.c |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 send-stream.c  |    6 ++++++
 send-stream.h  |    1 +
 send.h         |    3 ++-
 4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

cmds-receive.c +27 -0

index a8be6fa..74cbfc4 100644
@@ -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,

send-stream.c +6 -0

index 55fa728..9f3ede7 100644
@@ -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);

send-stream.h +1 -0

index b69b7f1..f83f2ac 100644
@@ -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,

send.h +2 -1

index 9934e94..10a88d2 100644
@@ -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,

Signature · 1 line

1.7.7.6

Alex Lyakas

2013-01-23 11:58 UTC #2 lore raw

Quoted 115 lines · Chen Yang

From: Chen Yang <[email protected]>
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 <[email protected]>

---
 cmds-receive.c |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 send-stream.c  |    6 ++++++
 send-stream.h  |    1 +
 send.h         |    3 ++-
 4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

cmds-receive.c +27 -0

index a8be6fa..74cbfc4 100644
@@ -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,

send-stream.c +6 -0

index 55fa728..9f3ede7 100644
@@ -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);

send-stream.h +1 -0

index b69b7f1..f83f2ac 100644
@@ -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,

send.h +1 -1

index 9934e94..10a88d2 100644
@@ -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)

send.h enum btrfs_send_cmd { · line 86

Quoted 7 lines

send.h +1 -0

@@ -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.

Quoted 7 lines

--
1.7.7.6
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

David Sterba

2013-01-23 15:46 UTC #5 lore raw

In reply to Chen Yang

Quoted 10 lines · Chen Yang

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.
cmds-receive.c +3 -0
+static int process_punch(const char *path, u64 offset, u64 len, void *user)
+{
+	int ret = 0;

cmds-receive.c out: · line 524

Quoted 10 lines

cmds-receive.c +10 -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.

cmds-receive.c out: · line 535

Quoted 11 lines

cmds-receive.c +11 -0

+	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

Alex Lyakas

2013-01-24 09:03 UTC #4 lore raw

In reply to a message not in the archive

Quoted 131 lines · Chen Yang

Quoted 119 lines · Chen Yang

Quoted 118 lines

From: Chen Yang <[email protected]>
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 <[email protected]>

---
 cmds-receive.c |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 send-stream.c  |    6 ++++++
 send-stream.h  |    1 +
 send.h         |    3 ++-
 4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

cmds-receive.c +27 -0

index a8be6fa..74cbfc4 100644
@@ -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,

send-stream.c +6 -0

index 55fa728..9f3ede7 100644
@@ -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);

send-stream.h +1 -0

index b69b7f1..f83f2ac 100644
@@ -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,

send.h +1 -1

index 9934e94..10a88d2 100644
@@ -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,

Quoted 11 lines

send.h enum btrfs_send_cmd { · line 86
Quoted 4 lines
send.h +1 -0
+       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.

Quoted 2 lines

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.

Quoted 22 lines

Thanks,
Chen.
Quoted 17 lines
Thanks,
Alex.
Quoted 7 lines
--
1.7.7.6
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to [email protected]
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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html