[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOyqgcX6HrbPU39nznmRMXJXtMWA0giYNRsio1jt1p5OU1jvOA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2021 17:12:47 -0800
From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@...ang.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@...omium.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Luis Lozano <llozano@...omium.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] fs: Add flag to file_system_type to indicate content
is generated
On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 4:38 PM Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 03:54:48PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 10:27:26AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >
> > > If you can't tell from userspace that a file has data in it other
> > > than by calling read() on it, then you can't use cfr on it.
> >
> > I don't know how to do that, Dave. :)
>
> If stat returns a non-zero size, then userspace knows it has at
> least that much data in it, whether it be zeros or previously
> written data. cfr will copy that data. The special zero length
> regular pipe files fail this simple "how much data is there to copy
> in this file" check...
This suggests that if the Go standard library sees that
copy_file_range reads zero bytes, we should assume that it failed, and
should use the fallback path as though copy_file_range returned
EOPNOTSUPP or EINVAL. This will cause an extra system call for an
empty file, but as long as copy_file_range does not return an error
for cases that it does not support we are going to need an extra
system call anyhow.
Does that seem like a possible mitigation? That is, are there cases
where copy_file_range will fail to do a correct copy, and will return
success, and will not return zero?
Ian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists