On Tuesday, February 27, 2024 3:46 AM, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
>On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 03:32:14PM +0000, Phillip Wood wrote:
>> Hi Randal
>>
>> [cc'ing Patrick for the reftable writer]
>>
>> > The question is which call is bad? The cruft stuff is relatively new
>> > and I don't know the code.
>> >
>> > > > reftable/writer.c: int n = w->write(w->write_arg,
zeroed,
>> > > > w->pending_padding);
>> > > > reftable/writer.c: n = w->write(w->write_arg, data, len);
>>
>> Neither of these appear to check for short writes and
>> reftable_fd_write() is a thin wrapper around write(). Maybe
>> reftable_fd_write() should be using write_in_full()?
>
>It already does starting with 85a8c899ce (reftable: handle interrupted
writes, 2023-12-11):
>
>```
>static ssize_t reftable_fd_write(void *arg, const void *data, size_t sz) {
> int *fdp = (int *)arg;
> return write_in_full(*fdp, data, sz);
>}
Unfortunately, this fix is included in what I am testing but does not impact
the issue I am seeing one way or another, but thank you.
