[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH] Data integrity extension support for xen-block
On 04/08/2016 05:44 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Fri, 8 Apr 2016, Bob Liu wrote: >> >> On 04/07/2016 11:55 PM, Juergen Gross wrote: >>> On 07/04/16 12:00, Bob Liu wrote: >>>> * What's data integrity extension and why? >>>> Modern filesystems feature checksumming of data and metadata to protect >>>> against >>>> data corruption. However, the detection of the corruption is done at read >>>> time >>>> which could potentially be months after the data was written. At that >>>> point the >>>> original data that the application tried to write is most likely lost. >>>> >>>> The solution in Linux is the data integrity framework which enables >>>> protection >>>> information to be pinned to I/Os and sent to/received from controllers that >>>> support it. struct bio has been extended with a pointer to a struct bip >>>> which >>>> in turn contains the integrity metadata. The bip is essentially a trimmed >>>> down >>>> bio with a bio_vec and some housekeeping. >>>> >>>> * Issues when xen-block get involved. >>>> xen-blkfront only transmits the normal data of struct bio while the >>>> integrity >>>> metadata buffer(struct bio_integrity_payload in each bio) is ignored. >>>> >>>> * Proposal of transmitting bio integrity payload. >>>> Adding an extra request following the normal data request, this extra >>>> request >>>> contains the integrity payload. >>>> The xen-blkback will reconstruct an new bio with both received normal data >>>> and >>>> integrity metadata. >>>> >>>> Welcome any better ideas, thank you! >>>> >>>> [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/280023/ >>>> [2] https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/block/data-integrity.txt >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Bob Liu <bob.liu@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> xen/include/public/io/blkif.h | 50 >>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/xen/include/public/io/blkif.h b/xen/include/public/io/blkif.h >>>> index 99f0326..3d8d39f 100644 >>>> --- a/xen/include/public/io/blkif.h >>>> +++ b/xen/include/public/io/blkif.h >>>> @@ -635,6 +635,28 @@ >>>> #define BLKIF_OP_INDIRECT 6 >>>> >>>> /* >>>> + * Recognized only if "feature-extra-request" is present in backend >>>> xenbus info. >>>> + * A request with BLKIF_OP_EXTRA_FLAG indicates an extra request is >>>> followed >>>> + * in the shared ring buffer. >>>> + * >>>> + * By this way, extra data like bio integrity payload can be transmitted >>>> from >>>> + * frontend to backend. >>>> + * >>>> + * The 'wire' format is like: >>>> + * Request 1: xen_blkif_request >>>> + * [Request 2: xen_blkif_extra_request] (only if request 1 has >>>> BLKIF_OP_EXTRA_FLAG) >>>> + * Request 3: xen_blkif_request >>>> + * Request 4: xen_blkif_request >>>> + * [Request 5: xen_blkif_extra_request] (only if request 4 has >>>> BLKIF_OP_EXTRA_FLAG) >>>> + * ... >>>> + * Request N: xen_blkif_request >>>> + * >>>> + * If a backend does not recognize BLKIF_OP_EXTRA_FLAG, it should *not* >>>> create the >>>> + * "feature-extra-request" node! >>>> + */ >>>> +#define BLKIF_OP_EXTRA_FLAG (0x80) >>>> + >>>> +/* >>>> * Maximum scatter/gather segments per request. >>>> * This is carefully chosen so that sizeof(blkif_ring_t) <= PAGE_SIZE. >>>> * NB. This could be 12 if the ring indexes weren't stored in the same >>>> page. >>>> @@ -703,6 +725,34 @@ struct blkif_request_indirect { >>>> }; >>>> typedef struct blkif_request_indirect blkif_request_indirect_t; >>>> >>>> +enum blkif_extra_request_type { >>>> + BLKIF_EXTRA_TYPE_DIX = 1, /* Data integrity extension >>>> payload. */ >>>> +}; >>>> + >>>> +struct bio_integrity_req { >>>> + /* >>>> + * Grant mapping for transmitting bio integrity payload to backend. >>>> + */ >>>> + grant_ref_t *gref; >>>> + unsigned int nr_grefs; >>>> + unsigned int len; >>>> +}; >>> >>> How does the payload look like? It's structure should be defined here >>> or a reference to it's definition in case it is a standard should be >>> given. >>> >> >> The payload is also described using struct bio_vec(the same as bio). >> >> /* >> * bio integrity payload >> */ >> struct bio_integrity_payload { >> struct bio *bip_bio; /* parent bio */ >> >> struct bvec_iter bip_iter; >> >> bio_end_io_t *bip_end_io; /* saved I/O completion fn */ >> >> unsigned short bip_slab; /* slab the bip came from */ >> unsigned short bip_vcnt; /* # of integrity bio_vecs */ >> unsigned short bip_max_vcnt; /* integrity bio_vec slots */ >> unsigned short bip_flags; /* control flags */ >> >> struct work_struct bip_work; /* I/O completion */ >> >> struct bio_vec *bip_vec; >> struct bio_vec bip_inline_vecs[0];/* embedded bvec array */ >> }; > > There's no way we are going to embed such a Linux specific payload into > the PV block protocol. Also, I have the feeling there are a lot of fields > in this struct that make no sense to transmit on the ring (work_struct?). > Only the bio_vec data bip_vec pointed is necessary to be transmitted. > TBH, I don't know much about this integrity thing. Why does the frontend > needs to create and pass this bio_integrity_payload around? Couldn't this > be created from blkback before sending the request down to the disk? Then > blkback would check the result and either return BLKIF_RSP_OKAY or > BLKIF_RSP_ERROR if the metadata doesn't match? > Yes, but that's only one use case. The Linux data integrity framework also allows the user space application or filesystem generating the metadata. * A filesystem in Guest that is integrity-aware can prepare I/Os with metadata attached. * Filesystems in Guest are capable of transferring metadata from user space. Those metadata get lost if we don't pass them through in blkfront. You may have a look at: [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/280023/ [2] https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/block/data-integrity.txt Thanks, Bob _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |