qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-block] [PATCH] block: posix: Always allocate the


From: Maxim Levitsky
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-block] [PATCH] block: posix: Always allocate the first block
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 01:17:30 +0300

On Sun, 2019-08-25 at 22:51 +0300, Nir Soffer wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 10:44 AM Maxim Levitsky <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2019-08-17 at 00:21 +0300, Nir Soffer wrote:
> > > When creating an image with preallocation "off" or "falloc", the first
> > > block of the image is typically not allocated. When using Gluster
> > > storage backed by XFS filesystem, reading this block using direct I/O
> > > succeeds regardless of request length, fooling alignment detection.
> > > 
> > > In this case we fallback to a safe value (4096) instead of the optimal
> > > value (512), which may lead to unneeded data copying when aligning
> > > requests.  Allocating the first block avoids the fallback.
> > > 
> > > When using preallocation=off, we always allocate at least one filesystem
> > > block:
> > > 
> > >     $ ./qemu-img create -f raw test.raw 1g
> > >     Formatting 'test.raw', fmt=raw size=1073741824
> > > 
> > >     $ ls -lhs test.raw
> > >     4.0K -rw-r--r--. 1 nsoffer nsoffer 1.0G Aug 16 23:48 test.raw
> > 
> > Are you sure about this?
> 
> This is the new behaviour with this change...
> 
> > [mlevitsk@maximlenovopc ~/work/test_area/posix-file 0]$ qemu-img create -f 
> > raw test.raw 1g -o preallocation=off
> > Formatting 'test.raw', fmt=raw size=1073741824 preallocation=off
> > [mlevitsk@maximlenovopc ~/work/test_area/posix-file 0]$ls -lhs ./test.raw 
> > 0 -rw-r--r--. 1 mlevitsk mlevitsk 1.0G Aug 25 10:38 ./test.raw
> > 
> > ext4, tested on qemu-4.0.0 and qemu git master.
> 
> And this is the old behavior. I guess the commit message does not make it 
> clear.

Ah, thanks!


> > From what I remember, the only case when posix-raw touches the first block 
> > is to zero it out
> > when running on top of kernel block device, to erase whatever header might 
> > be there, and this
> > is also kind of a backward compat hack which might be one day removed.
> 
> This change is only for file, on block storage we use BLKSSZGET.
>  
> > [...]
> > 
> > Best regards,
> >         Maxim Levitsky
> > 
> > 

Best regards,
        Maxim Levitsky





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]