On Mon, 2023-11-06 at 20:17 +0800, Xiubo Li wrote: > On 11/6/23 19:54, Ilya Dryomov wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 2:19 AM <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > For sparse reading the real length of the data should equal to the > > > total length from the extent array. > > > > > > URL: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/62081 > > > Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > net/ceph/osd_client.c | 8 ++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/net/ceph/osd_client.c b/net/ceph/osd_client.c > > > index 0e629dfd55ee..050dc39065fb 100644 > > > --- a/net/ceph/osd_client.c > > > +++ b/net/ceph/osd_client.c > > > @@ -5920,6 +5920,12 @@ static int osd_sparse_read(struct ceph_connection *con, > > > fallthrough; > > > case CEPH_SPARSE_READ_DATA: > > > if (sr->sr_index >= count) { > > > + if (sr->sr_datalen && count) { > > > + pr_warn_ratelimited("%s: datalen and extents mismath, %d left\n", > > > + __func__, sr->sr_datalen); > > > + return -EREMOTEIO; > > By returning EREMOTEIO here you have significantly changed the > > semantics (in v2 it was just a warning) but Jeff's Reviewed-by is > > retained. Has he acked the change? > > Oh, sorry I forgot to remove that. > > Jeff, Please take a look here again. > > Thanks > > - Xiubo > > Returning EREMOTEIO if the lengths don't match seems like a reasonable thing to do. You can retain the R-b. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
