On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 8:41 PM Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 08:00:50PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 7:09 PM Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > This discussion started with the btrfs search_ioctl() where, even if
> > > some bytes were written in copy_to_sk(), it always restarts from an
> > > earlier position, reattempting to write the same bytes. Since
> > > copy_to_sk() doesn't guarantee forward progress even if some bytes are
> > > writable, Linus' suggestion was for fault_in_writable() to probe the
> > > whole range. I consider this overkill since btrfs is the only one that
> > > needs probing every 16 bytes. The other cases like the new
> > > fault_in_safe_writeable() can be fixed by probing the first byte only
> > > followed by gup.
> >
> > Hmm. Direct I/O request sizes are multiples of the underlying device
> > block size, so we'll also get stuck there if fault-in won't give us a
> > full block. This is getting pretty ugly. So scratch that idea; let's
> > stick with probing the whole range.
>
> Ah, I wasn't aware of this. I got lost in the call trees but I noticed
> __iomap_dio_rw() does an iov_iter_revert() only if direction is READ. Is
> this the case for writes as well?
It's the EOF case, so it only applies to reads:
/*
* We only report that we've read data up to i_size.
* Revert iter to a state corresponding to that as some callers (such
* as the splice code) rely on it.
*/
if (iov_iter_rw(iter) == READ && iomi.pos >= dio->i_size)
iov_iter_revert(iter, iomi.pos - dio->i_size);
Andreas
