Re: [PATCH] erofs-utils: fuse: fix random readlink error

[胡玮文 <sehuww@mail.scut.edu.cn>]

On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 09:49:01AM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> Hi Weiwen,
> 
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 09:00:44AM +0800, 胡玮文 wrote:
> > Hi Xiang,
> > 
> > > 在 2021年1月22日，08:34，Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@redhat.com> 写道：
> > > 
> > > Hi Weiwen,
> > > 
> > >> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 12:31:43AM +0800, Hu Weiwen wrote:
> > >> readlink should fill a **null terminated** string in buffer.
> > >> 
> > >> Also, read should return number of bytes remaining on EOF.
> > >> 
> > >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-erofs/20210121101233.GC6680@DESKTOP-N4CECTO.huww98.cn/
> > >> Signed-off-by: Hu Weiwen <sehuww@mail.scut.edu.cn>
> > > 
> > > Thanks for catching this!
> > > 
> > >> ---
> > >> fuse/main.c | 14 +++++++++++++-
> > >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >> 
> > >> diff --git a/fuse/main.c b/fuse/main.c
> > >> index c162912..bc1e496 100644
> > >> --- a/fuse/main.c
> > >> +++ b/fuse/main.c
> > >> @@ -71,6 +71,12 @@ static int erofsfuse_read(const char *path, char *buffer,
> > >>    if (ret)
> > >>        return ret;
> > >> 
> > >> +    if (offset >= vi.i_size)
> > >> +        return 0;
> > >> +
> > >> +    if (offset + size > vi.i_size)
> > >> +        size = vi.i_size - offset;
> > >> +
> > > 
> > > It would be better to call erofs_pread() with the original offset
> > > and size (also I think there is some missing memset(0) for
> > > !EROFS_MAP_MAPPED), and fix up the return value to the needed value.
> > 
> > Yes, that is what I have initially tried. But this way is harder than I thought. 
> > EROFS_MAP_MAPPED flag seems to be designed to handle sparse file, and is reused to
> > represent EOF. So maybe we need a new flag to represent EOF? 
> 
> Nope, I think we just need to handle return value of read, I mean
> 
> erofs_ilookup()
> 
> ret = erofs_pread()
> if (ret)
> 	return ret;
> 
> if (offset + size > vi.i_size)
> 	return vi.i_size - offset;
> 
> return size;
> 
> Is that enough? Am I missing something?

This should work, except we should also add this branch

if (offset >= vi.i_size)
	return 0;

But how this is better than my original patch? I would say my patch should be
more efficient.

By saying "what I have initially tried" in my last mail, I mean changing
erofs_pread() to return the number of bytes read (just like pread system call,
instead of always 0). I think this is easier to understand for others, but
seems harder to implement. Do you think this is worthful?

> > So that we can distinguish EOF and hole in the middle, and return the bytes read.
> > Or we just abandon the sparse file support, and use EROFS_MAP_MAPPED to indicate
> > EOF exclusively. Since erofs current does not actually support this, right?
> 
> Actually, Pratik was working on it months ago, if you have some interest
> of uncompressed sparse files (since for compressed files, 0-ed data would
> be highly compressed by fixed-sized output compression.), could you pick
> his feature up if possible? That would be of great help to EROFS as long
> as you have some interest and extra time... :)
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200102094732.31567-1-pratikshinde320@gmail.com/
> 
> Thanks,
> Gao Xiang
> 
> > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Gao Xiang
> > > 
> > >>    ret = erofs_pread(&vi, buffer, size, offset);
> > >>    if (ret)
> > >>        return ret;
> > >> @@ -79,10 +85,16 @@ static int erofsfuse_read(const char *path, char *buffer,
> > >> 
> > >> static int erofsfuse_readlink(const char *path, char *buffer, size_t size)
> > >> {
> > >> -    int ret = erofsfuse_read(path, buffer, size, 0, NULL);
> > >> +    int ret;
> > >> +    size_t path_len;
> > >> +
> > >> +    erofs_dbg("path:%s size=%zd", path, size);
> > >> +    ret = erofsfuse_read(path, buffer, size, 0, NULL);
> > >> 
> > >>    if (ret < 0)
> > >>        return ret;
> > >> +    path_len = min(size - 1, (size_t)ret);
> > >> +    buffer[path_len] = '\0';
> > >>    return 0;
> > >> }
> > >> 
> > >> -- 
> > >> 2.30.0
> > >> 
> >