On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 11:24:48AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 8:36 AM Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Finally, the most important fix is to the pipe splicing code (aka the > > generic copy_file_range fallback) to avoid pointless short directio > > reads by only asking the filesystem for as much data as there are > > available pages in the pipe buffer. Our previous fix (simulated short > > directio reads because the number of pages didn't match the length of > > the read requested) caused subtle problems on overlayfs, so that part is > > reverted. > > Honestly, I really wish you simply wouldn't send me "xfs" fixes that > aren't really xfs-specific at all. > > All the splice patches (and honestly, I feel some of the iomap ones > too) that have come in through the xfs tree should have been handled > separately as actual VFS patches. Or at least had acks from Al or > something. > > I'm looking at that splice patch, and my initial reaction was "Hmm. > but that breaks 0 vs -EAGAIN". But then I realized that that's why > you're validating pipe->nrbufs, because the special temporary > per-thread pipe is always supposed to be empty on entry, so a zero > length can't happen. > > But just the fact that I felt like I had to go and look at one of > these commits makes me go "this is not an XFS fix at all, it shouldn't > have been treated as an XFS patch, and the original commit that > *caused* the problem shouldn't have been treated as one either". > > So please. I want to feel like when I get a XFS pull from the XFS > maintainer, I don't need to worry about it, and I can just do the git > pull without having to check details. > > But that means that when you do changes outside of XFS code, those > changes need to be handled _differently_. And they shouldn't be > bypassing Al etc. And even if you can't get an Ack from Al, send them > separately, so that I can check them without there being any XFS > issues that are mixed up with the pull. Ok, I'll put xfs and vfs changesets in separate pull requests in the future. Thanks for the feedback. --D > So the patch looks good, and I'm merging this, but I really really > don't have to feel like I need to look at xfs pulls this way. > > Linus
