On Wed, Dec 04, 2024 at 03:43:41PM +0000, John Garry wrote: > From: "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@xxxxxxxxx> > > Filesystems like ext4 can submit writes in multiples of blocksizes. > But we still can't allow the writes to be split into multiple BIOs. Hence > let's check if the iomap_length() is same as iter->len or not. > > It is the responsibility of userspace to ensure that a write does not span > mixed unwritten and mapped extents (which would lead to multiple BIOs). How is "userspace" supposed to do this? No existing utility in userspace is aware of atomic write limits or rtextsize configs, so how does "userspace" ensure everything is laid out in a manner compatible with atomic writes? e.g. restoring a backup (or other disaster recovery procedures) is going to have to lay the files out correctly for atomic writes. backup tools often sparsify the data set and so what gets restored will not have the same layout as the original data set... Where's the documentation that outlines all the restrictions on userspace behaviour to prevent this sort of problem being triggered? Common operations such as truncate, hole punch, buffered writes, reflinks, etc will trip over this, so application developers, users and admins really need to know what they should be doing to avoid stepping on this landmine... Further to that, what is the correction process for users to get rid of this error? They'll need some help from an atomic write constraint aware utility that can resilver the file such that these failures do not occur again. Can xfs_fsr do this? Or maybe the new exchangr-range code? Or does none of this infrastructure yet exist? > Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@xxxxxxxxx> > jpg: tweak commit message > Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/iomap/direct-io.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/iomap/direct-io.c b/fs/iomap/direct-io.c > index b521eb15759e..3dd883dd77d2 100644 > --- a/fs/iomap/direct-io.c > +++ b/fs/iomap/direct-io.c > @@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ static loff_t iomap_dio_bio_iter(const struct iomap_iter *iter, > size_t copied = 0; > size_t orig_count; > > - if (atomic && length != fs_block_size) > + if (atomic && length != iter->len) > return -EINVAL; Given this is now rejecting IOs that are otherwise well formed from userspace, this situation needs to have a different errno now. The userspace application has not provided an invalid set of IO parameters for this IO - the IO has been rejected because the previously set up persistent file layout was screwed up by something in the past. i.e. This is not an application IO submission error anymore, hence EINVAL is the wrong error to be returning to userspace here. -Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
