All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	cluster-devel <cluster-devel@redhat.com>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/8] iov_iter: Introduce iov_iter_fault_in_writeable helper
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2021 12:52:34 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whodi=ZPhoJy_a47VD+-aFtz385B4_GHvQp8Bp9NdTKUg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210724193449.361667-2-agruenba@redhat.com>

On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 12:35 PM Andreas Gruenbacher
<agruenba@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> +int iov_iter_fault_in_writeable(const struct iov_iter *i, size_t bytes)
> +{
...
> +                       if (fault_in_user_pages(start, len, true) != len)
> +                               return -EFAULT;

Looking at this once more, I think this is likely wrong.

Why?

Because any user can/should only care about at least *part* of the
area being writable.

Imagine that you're doing a large read. If the *first* page is
writable, you should still return the partial read, not -EFAULT.

So I think the code needs to return 0 if _any_ fault was successful.
Or perhaps return how much it was able to fault in. Because returning
-EFAULT if any of it failed seems wrong, and doesn't allow for partial
success being reported.

The other reaction I have is that you now only do the
iov_iter_fault_in_writeable, but then you make fault_in_user_pages()
still have that "bool write" argument.

We already have 'fault_in_pages_readable()', and that one is more
efficient (well, at least if the fault isn't needed it is). So it
would make more sense to just implement fault_in_pages_writable()
instead of that "fault_in_user_pages(, bool write)".

                 Linus

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com>
Cc: cluster-devel <cluster-devel@redhat.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com
Subject: Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH v4 1/8] iov_iter: Introduce iov_iter_fault_in_writeable helper
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2021 12:52:34 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whodi=ZPhoJy_a47VD+-aFtz385B4_GHvQp8Bp9NdTKUg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210724193449.361667-2-agruenba@redhat.com>

On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 12:35 PM Andreas Gruenbacher
<agruenba@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> +int iov_iter_fault_in_writeable(const struct iov_iter *i, size_t bytes)
> +{
...
> +                       if (fault_in_user_pages(start, len, true) != len)
> +                               return -EFAULT;

Looking at this once more, I think this is likely wrong.

Why?

Because any user can/should only care about at least *part* of the
area being writable.

Imagine that you're doing a large read. If the *first* page is
writable, you should still return the partial read, not -EFAULT.

So I think the code needs to return 0 if _any_ fault was successful.
Or perhaps return how much it was able to fault in. Because returning
-EFAULT if any of it failed seems wrong, and doesn't allow for partial
success being reported.

The other reaction I have is that you now only do the
iov_iter_fault_in_writeable, but then you make fault_in_user_pages()
still have that "bool write" argument.

We already have 'fault_in_pages_readable()', and that one is more
efficient (well, at least if the fault isn't needed it is). So it
would make more sense to just implement fault_in_pages_writable()
instead of that "fault_in_user_pages(, bool write)".

                 Linus

_______________________________________________
Ocfs2-devel mailing list
Ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com
https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
Subject: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v4 1/8] iov_iter: Introduce iov_iter_fault_in_writeable helper
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2021 12:52:34 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whodi=ZPhoJy_a47VD+-aFtz385B4_GHvQp8Bp9NdTKUg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210724193449.361667-2-agruenba@redhat.com>

On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 12:35 PM Andreas Gruenbacher
<agruenba@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> +int iov_iter_fault_in_writeable(const struct iov_iter *i, size_t bytes)
> +{
...
> +                       if (fault_in_user_pages(start, len, true) != len)
> +                               return -EFAULT;

Looking at this once more, I think this is likely wrong.

Why?

Because any user can/should only care about at least *part* of the
area being writable.

Imagine that you're doing a large read. If the *first* page is
writable, you should still return the partial read, not -EFAULT.

So I think the code needs to return 0 if _any_ fault was successful.
Or perhaps return how much it was able to fault in. Because returning
-EFAULT if any of it failed seems wrong, and doesn't allow for partial
success being reported.

The other reaction I have is that you now only do the
iov_iter_fault_in_writeable, but then you make fault_in_user_pages()
still have that "bool write" argument.

We already have 'fault_in_pages_readable()', and that one is more
efficient (well, at least if the fault isn't needed it is). So it
would make more sense to just implement fault_in_pages_writable()
instead of that "fault_in_user_pages(, bool write)".

                 Linus



  reply	other threads:[~2021-07-24 19:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-24 19:34 [PATCH v4 0/8] gfs2: Fix mmap + page fault deadlocks Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34 ` [Cluster-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34 ` [PATCH v4 1/8] iov_iter: Introduce iov_iter_fault_in_writeable helper Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Cluster-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:52   ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2021-07-24 19:52     ` [Cluster-devel] " Linus Torvalds
2021-07-24 19:52     ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Linus Torvalds
2021-07-24 20:24     ` Al Viro
2021-07-24 20:24       ` [Cluster-devel] " Al Viro
2021-07-24 20:24       ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Al Viro
2021-07-24 20:37       ` Linus Torvalds
2021-07-24 20:37         ` [Cluster-devel] " Linus Torvalds
2021-07-24 20:37         ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Linus Torvalds
2021-07-24 21:38       ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 21:38         ` [Cluster-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 21:38         ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 21:57         ` Al Viro
2021-07-24 21:57           ` [Cluster-devel] " Al Viro
2021-07-24 21:57           ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Al Viro
2021-07-24 22:06           ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 22:06             ` [Cluster-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 22:06             ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 23:39             ` Al Viro
2021-07-24 23:39               ` [Cluster-devel] " Al Viro
2021-07-24 23:39               ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Al Viro
2021-07-27  9:30     ` David Laight
2021-07-27  9:30       ` [Cluster-devel] " David Laight
2021-07-27  9:30       ` [Ocfs2-devel] " David Laight
2021-07-27 11:13       ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-27 11:13         ` [Cluster-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-27 11:13         ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-27 17:51         ` Linus Torvalds
2021-07-27 17:51           ` [Cluster-devel] " Linus Torvalds
2021-07-27 17:51           ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Linus Torvalds
2021-07-24 19:34 ` [PATCH v4 2/8] gfs2: Add wrapper for iomap_file_buffered_write Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Cluster-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34 ` [PATCH v4 3/8] gfs2: Fix mmap + page fault deadlocks for buffered I/O Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Cluster-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34 ` [PATCH v4 4/8] iomap: Fix iomap_dio_rw return value for user copies Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Cluster-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34 ` [PATCH v4 5/8] iomap: Add done_before argument to iomap_dio_rw Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Cluster-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34 ` [PATCH v4 6/8] iomap: Support restarting direct I/O requests after user copy failures Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Cluster-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34 ` [PATCH v4 7/8] iov_iter: Introduce noio flag to disable page faults Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Cluster-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34 ` [PATCH v4 8/8] gfs2: Fix mmap + page fault deadlocks for direct I/O Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Cluster-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2021-07-24 19:34   ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher

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='CAHk-=whodi=ZPhoJy_a47VD+-aFtz385B4_GHvQp8Bp9NdTKUg@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=agruenba@redhat.com \
    --cc=cluster-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.