LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] iter revert problems
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2021 19:56:21 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a03abd9e-82c1-7a63-a0dc-c7319f0c0751@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YRFPR25scNRYaRzW@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>

On 8/9/21 4:52 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 12:52:35PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> For the bug description see 2/2. As mentioned there the current problems
>> is because of generic_write_checks(), but there was also a similar case
>> fixed in 5.12, which should have been triggerable by normal
>> write(2)/read(2) and others.
>>
>> It may be better to enforce reexpands as a long term solution, but for
>> now this patchset is quickier and easier to backport.
> 
> 	Umm...  Won't that screw the cases where we *are* doing proper
> reexpands?  AFAICS, with your patches that flag doesn't go away once
> it had been set...

In general, the userspace should already expecting and retrying on
EAGAIN, and it seems to me, truncates should be rare enough to not
care much about performance. However, it'd better to be more careful
with nowait attempts.

For instance, we can avoid failing reexpanded and reverted iters.

if (i->truncated && iov_iter_count(i) != orig_size)
	// fail;

Or even re-import iov+iter, if still in the right context.


Al, is that viable to you on the iov side?

-- 
Pavel Begunkov

  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-09 18:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-09 11:52 Pavel Begunkov
2021-08-09 11:52 ` [PATCH 1/2] iov_iter: mark truncated iters Pavel Begunkov
2021-08-09 11:52 ` [PATCH 2/2] io_uring: don't retry with truncated iter Pavel Begunkov
2021-08-09 15:52 ` [PATCH 0/2] iter revert problems Al Viro
2021-08-09 18:56   ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2021-08-10  8:47   ` David Laight

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=a03abd9e-82c1-7a63-a0dc-c7319f0c0751@gmail.com \
    --to=asml.silence@gmail.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 0/2] iter revert problems' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).