Re: iov_iter_pipe warning.

From: Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: iov_iter_pipe warning.
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 16:07:24 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170910200724.let6gkxhkvlg6nkr@codemonkey.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170910200547.GD5426@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>

On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 09:05:48PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
 > On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 12:07:10PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
 > > On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 03:57:21AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
 > >  > On Sat, Sep 09, 2017 at 09:07:56PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
 > >  > 
 > >  > > With this in place, I'm still seeing -EBUSY from invalidate_inode_pages2_range
 > >  > > which doesn't end well...
 > >  > 
 > >  > Different issue, and I'm not sure why that WARN_ON() is there in the
 > >  > first place.  Note that in a similar situation generic_file_direct_write()
 > >  > simply buggers off and lets the caller do buffered write...
 > >  > 
 > >  > iov_iter_pipe() warning is a sign of ->read_iter() on pipe-backed iov_iter
 > >  > putting into the pipe more than it claims to have done.
 > > 
 > > (from a rerun after hitting that EBUSY warn; hence the taint)
 > > 
 > > WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 14154 at fs/iomap.c:1055 iomap_dio_rw+0x78e/0x840
 > 
 > ... and that's another invalidate_inode_pages2_range() in the same
 > sucker.  Again, compare with generic_file_direct_write()...
 > 
 > I don't believe that this one has anything splice-specific to do with it.
 > And its only relation to iov_iter_pipe() splat is that it's in the same
 > fs/iomap.c...

The interesting part is that I'm hitting these two over and over now
rather than the iov_iter_pipe warning.  Could just be unlucky
randomness though..

	Dave