On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 12:45:53PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > I was like "oh, I'm sure this is some temporary hack, it will be gone > by the end of the series". > > It wasn't gone by the end. > > There's two copies of that pattern, and at the very least it needs a > big comment about what this pattern does and why. The thing is, I'm not sure what to do with it; it was brought by the LTP vmsplice test, which asks to feed 128Kb into a pipe. With the caller itself on the other end of that pipe, SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK *not* given and the pipe capacity being 64Kb. Unfortunately, "quietly truncate the length down to 64Kb" does *not* suffice - the damn thing starts not at the page boundary, so we only copy about 62Kb until hitting the pipe overflow (the pipe is initially empty). The reason why it doesn't go to sleep indefinitely on the mainline kernel is that mainline collects up to page->buffers *pages*, before feeding them into the pipe. And these ~62Kb are just that. Note that had there been anything already in the pipe, the same call would've gone to sleep (and in the end transferred the same ~62Kb worth of data). All of that is completely undocumented in vmsplice(2) (or anywhere else that I'd been able to find) ;-/ OTOH, considering the quality of documentation, I'm somewhat tempted to go for "sleep only if it had been completely full when we entered; once there's some space feed as much as fits and be done with that". OTTH, I'm not sure that no userland cr^Hode will manage to be hurt by that variant... _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
