Hi Dave and Christoph
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:12:53PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 02:57:14AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:22:39AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > You do realise that local filesystems can silently change the
> > location of file data at any point in time, so there is no such
> > thing as a "stable mapping" of file data to block device addresses
> > in userspace?
> > If you want remote access to the blocks owned and controlled by a
> > filesystem, then you need to use a filesystem with a remote locking
> > mechanism to allow co-ordinated, coherent access to the data in
> > those blocks. Anything else is just asking for ongoing, unfixable
> > filesystem corruption or data leakage problems (i.e. security
> > issues).
Dave are you saying that even for local mappings of files on a DAX
capable system it is possible for the mappings to move on you unless
the FS supports locking? Does that not mean DAX on such FS is
> And at least for XFS we have such a mechanism :) E.g. I have a
> prototype of a pNFS layout that uses XFS+DAX to allow clients to do
> RDMA directly to XFS files, with the same locking mechanism we use
> for the current block and scsi layout in xfs_pnfs.c.
Thanks for fixing this issue on XFS Christoph! I assume this problem
continues to exist on the other DAX capable FS?
One more reason to consider a move to /dev/dax I guess ;-)...
Oh, that's good to know - pNFS over XFS was exactly what I was
thinking of when I wrote my earlier reply. A few months ago someone
else was trying to use file mappings in userspace for direct remote
client access on fabric connected devices. I told them "pNFS on XFS
and write an efficient transport for you hardware"....
Now that I know we've got RDMA support for pNFS on XFS in the
pipeline, I can just tell them "just write an rdma driver for your
hardware" instead. :P