On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 9:34 AM, Ross Zwisler
<ross.zwisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 05:06:42PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> In preparation for protecting the dax read(2) path from media errors
>> with copy_to_iter_mcsafe() (via dax_copy_to_iter()), convert the
>> implementation to report the bytes successfully transferred.
>>
>> Cc: <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> fs/dax.c | 20 +++++++++++---------
>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
>> index a64afdf7ec0d..34a2d435ae4b 100644
>> --- a/fs/dax.c
>> +++ b/fs/dax.c
>> @@ -991,6 +991,7 @@ dax_iomap_actor(struct inode *inode, loff_t pos, loff_t length, void *data,
>> struct iov_iter *iter = data;
>> loff_t end = pos + length, done = 0;
>> ssize_t ret = 0;
>> + size_t xfer;
>> int id;
>>
>> if (iov_iter_rw(iter) == READ) {
>> @@ -1054,19 +1055,20 @@ dax_iomap_actor(struct inode *inode, loff_t pos, loff_t length, void *data,
>> * vfs_write(), depending on which operation we are doing.
>> */
>> if (iov_iter_rw(iter) == WRITE)
>> - map_len = dax_copy_from_iter(dax_dev, pgoff, kaddr,
>> + xfer = dax_copy_from_iter(dax_dev, pgoff, kaddr,
>> map_len, iter);
>> else
>> - map_len = dax_copy_to_iter(dax_dev, pgoff, kaddr,
>> + xfer = dax_copy_to_iter(dax_dev, pgoff, kaddr,
>> map_len, iter);
>> - if (map_len <= 0) {
>> - ret = map_len ? map_len : -EFAULT;
>> - break;
>> - }
>>
>> - pos += map_len;
>> - length -= map_len;
>> - done += map_len;
>> + pos += xfer;
>> + length -= xfer;
>> + done += xfer;
>> +
>> + if (xfer == 0)
>> + ret = -EFAULT;
>> + if (xfer < map_len)
>> + break;
>
> I'm confused by this error handling. So if we hit an error on a given iov and
> we don't transfer the expected number of bytes, we have two cases:
>
> 1) We transferred *something* on this iov but not everything - return success.
> 2) We didn't transfer anything on this iov - return -EFAULT.
>
> Both of these are true regardless of data transferred on previous iovs.
>
> Why the distinction? If a given iov is interrupted, regardless of whether it
> transferred 0 bytes or 1, shouldn't the error path be the same?
This is is the semantics of read(2) / write(2). Quoting the pwrite man page:
Note that is not an error for a successful call to
transfer fewer bytes than
requested (see read(2) and write(2)).
