On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 8:34 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Linus, do you have any objections against such behaviour change? AFAICS,
> all it takes is this:
>
> diff --git a/fs/direct-io.c b/fs/direct-io.c
> index 7c3ce73..3a8ebda 100644
> --- a/fs/direct-io.c
> +++ b/fs/direct-io.c
> @@ -246,6 +246,8 @@ static ssize_t dio_complete(struct dio *dio, ssize_t ret, bool is_async)
> if ((dio->op == REQ_OP_READ) &&
> ((offset + transferred) > dio->i_size))
> transferred = dio->i_size - offset;
> + if (ret == -EFAULT)
> + ret = 0;
I don't think that's right. To me it looks like the short read case
might have changed "transferred" back to zero, in which case we do
*not* want to skip the EFAULT.
But if there's some reason that can't happen (ie "dio->i_size" is
guaranteed to be larger than "offset"), then with a comment to that
effect it's ok.
Otherwise I think it would need to be something like
/* If we were partially successful, ignore later EFAULT */
if (transferred && ret == -EFAULT)
ret = 0;
or something. Yes?
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
