222 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			9.2 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			HTML
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			222 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			9.2 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			HTML
		
	
	
	
	
	
<title>L10</title>
 | 
						|
<html>
 | 
						|
<head>
 | 
						|
</head>
 | 
						|
<body>
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<h1>File systems</h1>
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>Required reading: iread, iwrite, and wdir, and code related to
 | 
						|
  these calls in fs.c, bio.c, ide.c, file.c, and sysfile.c
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<h2>Overview</h2>
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>The next 3 lectures are about file systems:
 | 
						|
<ul>
 | 
						|
<li>Basic file system implementation
 | 
						|
<li>Naming
 | 
						|
<li>Performance
 | 
						|
</ul>
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>Users desire to store their data durable so that data survives when
 | 
						|
the user turns of his computer.  The primary media for doing so are:
 | 
						|
magnetic disks, flash memory, and tapes.  We focus on magnetic disks
 | 
						|
(e.g., through the IDE interface in xv6).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>To allow users to remember where they stored a file, they can
 | 
						|
assign a symbolic name to a file, which appears in a directory.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>The data in a file can be organized in a structured way or not.
 | 
						|
The structured variant is often called a database.  UNIX uses the
 | 
						|
unstructured variant: files are streams of bytes.  Any particular
 | 
						|
structure is likely to be useful to only a small class of
 | 
						|
applications, and other applications will have to work hard to fit
 | 
						|
their data into one of the pre-defined structures. Besides, if you
 | 
						|
want structure, you can easily write a user-mode library program that
 | 
						|
imposes that format on any file.  The end-to-end argument in action.
 | 
						|
(Databases have special requirements and support an important class of
 | 
						|
applications, and thus have a specialized plan.)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>The API for a minimal file system consists of: open, read, write,
 | 
						|
seek, close, and stat.  Dup duplicates a file descriptor. For example:
 | 
						|
<pre>
 | 
						|
  fd = open("x", O_RDWR);
 | 
						|
  read (fd, buf, 100);
 | 
						|
  write (fd, buf, 512);
 | 
						|
  close (fd)
 | 
						|
</pre>
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>Maintaining the file offset behind the read/write interface is an
 | 
						|
  interesting design decision . The alternative is that the state of a
 | 
						|
  read operation should be maintained by the process doing the reading
 | 
						|
  (i.e., that the pointer should be passed as an argument to read).
 | 
						|
  This argument is compelling in view of the UNIX fork() semantics,
 | 
						|
  which clones a process which shares the file descriptors of its
 | 
						|
  parent. A read by the parent of a shared file descriptor (e.g.,
 | 
						|
  stdin, changes the read pointer seen by the child).  On the other
 | 
						|
  hand the alternative would make it difficult to get "(data; ls) > x"
 | 
						|
  right.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>Unix API doesn't specify that the effects of write are immediately
 | 
						|
  on the disk before a write returns. It is up to the implementation
 | 
						|
  of the file system within certain bounds. Choices include (that
 | 
						|
  aren't non-exclusive):
 | 
						|
<ul>
 | 
						|
<li>At some point in the future, if the system stays up (e.g., after
 | 
						|
  30 seconds);
 | 
						|
<li>Before the write returns;
 | 
						|
<li>Before close returns;
 | 
						|
<li>User specified (e.g., before fsync returns).
 | 
						|
</ul>
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>A design issue is the semantics of a file system operation that
 | 
						|
  requires multiple disk writes.  In particular, what happens if the
 | 
						|
  logical update requires writing multiple disks blocks and the power
 | 
						|
  fails during the update?  For example, to create a new file,
 | 
						|
  requires allocating an inode (which requires updating the list of
 | 
						|
  free inodes on disk), writing a directory entry to record the
 | 
						|
  allocated i-node under the name of the new file (which may require
 | 
						|
  allocating a new block and updating the directory inode).  If the
 | 
						|
  power fails during the operation, the list of free inodes and blocks
 | 
						|
  may be inconsistent with the blocks and inodes in use. Again this is
 | 
						|
  up to implementation of the file system to keep on disk data
 | 
						|
  structures consistent:
 | 
						|
<ul>
 | 
						|
<li>Don't worry about it much, but use a recovery program to bring
 | 
						|
  file system back into a consistent state.
 | 
						|
<li>Journaling file system.  Never let the file system get into an
 | 
						|
  inconsistent state.
 | 
						|
</ul>
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>Another design issue is the semantics are of concurrent writes to
 | 
						|
the same data item.  What is the order of two updates that happen at
 | 
						|
the same time? For example, two processes open the same file and write
 | 
						|
to it.  Modern Unix operating systems allow the application to lock a
 | 
						|
file to get exclusive access.  If file locking is not used and if the
 | 
						|
file descriptor is shared, then the bytes of the two writes will get
 | 
						|
into the file in some order (this happens often for log files).  If
 | 
						|
the file descriptor is not shared, the end result is not defined. For
 | 
						|
example, one write may overwrite the other one (e.g., if they are
 | 
						|
writing to the same part of the file.)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>An implementation issue is performance, because writing to magnetic
 | 
						|
disk is relatively expensive compared to computing. Three primary ways
 | 
						|
to improve performance are: careful file system layout that induces
 | 
						|
few seeks, an in-memory cache of frequently-accessed blocks, and
 | 
						|
overlap I/O with computation so that file operations don't have to
 | 
						|
wait until their completion and so that that the disk driver has more
 | 
						|
data to write, which allows disk scheduling. (We will talk about
 | 
						|
performance in detail later.)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<h2>xv6 code examples</h2>
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>xv6 implements a minimal Unix file system interface. xv6 doesn't
 | 
						|
pay attention to file system layout. It overlaps computation and I/O,
 | 
						|
but doesn't do any disk scheduling.  Its cache is write-through, which
 | 
						|
simplifies keep on disk datastructures consistent, but is bad for
 | 
						|
performance.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>On disk files are represented by an inode (struct dinode in fs.h),
 | 
						|
and blocks.  Small files have up to 12 block addresses in their inode;
 | 
						|
large files use files the last address in the inode as a disk address
 | 
						|
for a block with 128 disk addresses (512/4).  The size of a file is
 | 
						|
thus limited to 12 * 512 + 128*512 bytes.  What would you change to
 | 
						|
support larger files? (Ans: e.g., double indirect blocks.)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>Directories are files with a bit of structure to them. The file
 | 
						|
contains of records of the type struct dirent.  The entry contains the
 | 
						|
name for a file (or directory) and its corresponding inode number.
 | 
						|
How many files can appear in a directory?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>In memory files are represented by struct inode in fsvar.h. What is
 | 
						|
the role of the additional fields in struct inode?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>What is xv6's disk layout?  How does xv6 keep track of free blocks
 | 
						|
  and inodes? See balloc()/bfree() and ialloc()/ifree().  Is this
 | 
						|
  layout a good one for performance?  What are other options?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>Let's assume that an application created an empty file x with
 | 
						|
  contains 512 bytes, and that the application now calls read(fd, buf,
 | 
						|
  100), that is, it is requesting to read 100 bytes into buf.
 | 
						|
  Furthermore, let's assume that the inode for x is is i. Let's pick
 | 
						|
  up what happens by investigating readi(), line 4483.
 | 
						|
<ul>
 | 
						|
<li>4488-4492: can iread be called on other objects than files?  (Yes.
 | 
						|
  For example, read from the keyboard.)  Everything is a file in Unix.
 | 
						|
<li>4495: what does bmap do?
 | 
						|
<ul>
 | 
						|
<li>4384: what block is being read?
 | 
						|
</ul>
 | 
						|
<li>4483: what does bread do?  does bread always cause a read to disk?
 | 
						|
<ul>
 | 
						|
<li>4006: what does bget do?  it implements a simple cache of
 | 
						|
  recently-read disk blocks.
 | 
						|
<ul>
 | 
						|
<li>How big is the cache?  (see param.h)
 | 
						|
<li>3972: look if the requested block is in the cache by walking down
 | 
						|
  a circular list.
 | 
						|
<li>3977: we had a match.
 | 
						|
<li>3979: some other process has "locked" the block, wait until it
 | 
						|
  releases.  the other processes releases the block using brelse().
 | 
						|
Why lock a block?
 | 
						|
<ul>
 | 
						|
<li>Atomic read and update.  For example, allocating an inode: read
 | 
						|
  block containing inode, mark it allocated, and write it back.  This
 | 
						|
  operation must be atomic.
 | 
						|
</ul>
 | 
						|
<li>3982: it is ours now.
 | 
						|
<li>3987: it is not in the cache; we need to find a cache entry to
 | 
						|
  hold the block.
 | 
						|
<li>3987: what is the cache replacement strategy? (see also brelse())
 | 
						|
<li>3988: found an entry that we are going to use.
 | 
						|
<li>3989: mark it ours but don't mark it valid (there is no valid data
 | 
						|
  in the entry yet).
 | 
						|
</ul>
 | 
						|
<li>4007: if the block was in the cache and the entry has the block's
 | 
						|
  data, return.
 | 
						|
<li>4010: if the block wasn't in the cache, read it from disk. are
 | 
						|
  read's synchronous or asynchronous?
 | 
						|
<ul>
 | 
						|
<li>3836: a bounded buffer of outstanding disk requests.
 | 
						|
<li>3809: tell the disk to move arm and generate an interrupt.
 | 
						|
<li>3851: go to sleep and run some other process to run. time sharing
 | 
						|
  in action.
 | 
						|
<li>3792: interrupt: arm is in the right position; wakeup requester.
 | 
						|
<li>3856: read block from disk.
 | 
						|
<li>3860: remove request from bounded buffer.  wakeup processes that
 | 
						|
  are waiting for a slot.
 | 
						|
<li>3864: start next disk request, if any. xv6 can overlap I/O with
 | 
						|
computation.
 | 
						|
</ul>
 | 
						|
<li>4011: mark the cache entry has holding the data.
 | 
						|
</ul>
 | 
						|
<li>4498: To where is the block copied?  is dst a valid user address?
 | 
						|
</ul>
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>Now let's suppose that the process is writing 512 bytes at the end
 | 
						|
  of the file a. How many disk writes will happen?
 | 
						|
<ul>
 | 
						|
<li>4567: allocate a new block
 | 
						|
<ul>
 | 
						|
<li>4518: allocate a block: scan block map, and write entry
 | 
						|
<li>4523: How many disk operations if the process would have been appending
 | 
						|
  to a large file? (Answer: read indirect block, scan block map, write
 | 
						|
  block map.)
 | 
						|
</ul>
 | 
						|
<li>4572: read the block that the process will be writing, in case the
 | 
						|
  process writes only part of the block.
 | 
						|
<li>4574: write it. is it synchronous or asynchronous? (Ans:
 | 
						|
  synchronous but with timesharing.)
 | 
						|
</ul>
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
<p>Lots of code to implement reading and writing of files. How about
 | 
						|
  directories?
 | 
						|
<ul>
 | 
						|
<li>4722: look for the directory, reading directory block and see if a
 | 
						|
  directory entry is unused (inum == 0).
 | 
						|
<li>4729: use it and update it.
 | 
						|
<li>4735: write the modified block.
 | 
						|
</ul>
 | 
						|
<p>Reading and writing of directories is trivial.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
</body>
 |