From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 822DDC388F2 for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 18:38:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3AF22074B; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 18:38:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="DzOO2up7"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="KnStrpvd"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ke2jgXQE" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E3AF22074B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ka1Cm-0005QD-JJ; Tue, 03 Nov 2020 18:38:52 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ka1Cl-0005Q5-DE for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 03 Nov 2020 18:38:51 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=t47ZHoH/WiZrIOdyBf9JhmIWRdujT7t1PgwImejEP48=; b=DzOO2up7uhsQ7rwOWaFbn0uRGr vVKlDNfxWoPgZfvHBVMLR40xmOfd+v/U7FPHQ0GDqs2EmrmTGujK1NwG39nYxmvm4ELj1E3xPL8kH A5+nymi8qcJ3Y/Tv485DOw+m60sWnpAeyFkW4NKygThwWeNmH0AgKnxQSymx8rIMBlVM=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To :From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=t47ZHoH/WiZrIOdyBf9JhmIWRdujT7t1PgwImejEP48=; b=KnStrpvdSowwqcLz8RM4diI97A R5LDMP4o1Z/6tFy0aAoayMvPCb4zQc7vK08PIU1BrjU3UJwX/tvDp73I5KadgykUTYldS8gKgnaQB sQO3xOeNLm9AWQny8Fm8V3fiS+pl6rCSwH2kLVbfMfprQDdcG48EBETEE5oXGKeUr9RQ=; Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by sfi-mx-1.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.2) id 1ka1Cj-0086JD-9t for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 03 Nov 2020 18:38:51 +0000 Received: from google.com (unknown [104.132.1.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3299B2074B; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 18:38:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1604428721; bh=YUU7O0xdkH9I0WPyXBZOk+F4aYmRrcXzu3VCC7u62jY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ke2jgXQEiYikomRounWe5La8GXGy6aMYfzYjBicVKTz0+2z3ePhwj2okspsy3x1Sj pR9Pi8/c5eQQnno2G9Cv+LNNr0OD0bmFRDuvSb3ZJlb7zJr8cqbpJbCx1RgT+O2n1u eVzeZ0z3pW60GVRwYuYpQu2lxvWaFAAVyBYadbAU= Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 10:38:39 -0800 From: Jaegeuk Kim To: Chao Yu Message-ID: <20201103183839.GA1273166@google.com> References: <20201102062131.14205-1-yuchao0@huawei.com> <20201103032234.GB2875@sol.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Headers-End: 1ka1Cj-0086JD-9t Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v3] f2fs: move ioctl interface definitions to separated file X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Eric Biggers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On 11/03, Chao Yu wrote: > On 2020/11/3 11:22, Eric Biggers wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 02:21:31PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > > > +#define F2FS_IOC_MOVE_RANGE _IOWR(F2FS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 9, \ > > > + struct f2fs_move_range) > > [...] > > > +#define F2FS_IOC_GARBAGE_COLLECT_RANGE _IOW(F2FS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 11, \ > > > + struct f2fs_gc_range) > > [...] > > > + > > > +struct f2fs_gc_range { > > > + __u32 sync; > > > + __u64 start; > > > + __u64 len; > > > +}; > > [...] > > > +struct f2fs_move_range { > > > + __u32 dst_fd; /* destination fd */ > > > + __u64 pos_in; /* start position in src_fd */ > > > + __u64 pos_out; /* start position in dst_fd */ > > > + __u64 len; /* size to move */ > > > +}; > > > > These two structs are weird because there is implicit padding between the __u32 > > field and the following __u64 field on some 32-bit architectures (e.g. x86_32) > > but not others (e.g. arm32). > > > > But f2fs_compat_ioctl() doesn't handle these two ioctls specially, but rather > > just calls through to f2fs_ioctl(). That's wrong, and it means that > > F2FS_IOC_MOVE_RANGE and F2FS_IOC_GARBAGE_COLLECT_RANGE won't work when called > > from an x86_32 binary on an x86_64 kernel. > > Nice catch! > > > > > So something needs to be fixed. I wonder if it's safe to just explicitly add > > the padding field after the fact. If no one is actually using these two ioctls > > in a case where both userspace and the kernel lack the implicit padding (e.g., > > x86_32 userspace with x86_32 kernel), it should be fine... > > IIRC, Jaegeuk added those interfaces, I hope it's not the requirement from other > f2fs userspace developers...if it is, there may be users. > > I found one patch in ext4 which fixes the similar issue, I guess we can fix this > with the same way, thoughts? Agreed. Please fix along with f2fs-tools/f2fs_io. > > commit 4d92dc0f00a775dc2e1267b0e00befb783902fe7 > Author: Ben Hutchings > Date: Mon May 17 06:00:00 2010 -0400 > > ext4: Fix compat EXT4_IOC_ADD_GROUP > > struct ext4_new_group_input needs to be converted because u64 has > only 32-bit alignment on some 32-bit architectures, notably i386. > > Thanks, > > > > > - Eric > > . > > _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel