linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 03/10] fs: Initial atomic write support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <eef12540-84b6-4591-a797-6cfea7b28d48@kernel.dk>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2024 10:05:04 -0700
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>, kbusch@...nel.org, hch@....de,
 sagi@...mberg.me, jejb@...ux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
 djwong@...nel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org,
 dchinner@...hat.com, jack@...e.cz
Cc: linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
 tytso@....edu, jbongio@...gle.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
 ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com, linux-aio@...ck.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
 io-uring@...r.kernel.org, nilay@...ux.ibm.com, ritesh.list@...il.com,
 Prasad Singamsetty <prasad.singamsetty@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 03/10] fs: Initial atomic write support

On 3/8/24 9:52 AM, John Garry wrote:
> On 08/03/2024 16:34, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 2/26/24 10:36 AM, John Garry wrote:
>>> diff --git a/io_uring/rw.c b/io_uring/rw.c
>>> index d5e79d9bdc71..099dda3ff151 100644
>>> --- a/io_uring/rw.c
>>> +++ b/io_uring/rw.c
>>> @@ -719,7 +719,7 @@ static int io_rw_init_file(struct io_kiocb *req, fmode_t mode)
>>>       struct kiocb *kiocb = &rw->kiocb;
>>>       struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
>>>       struct file *file = req->file;
>>> -    int ret;
>>> +    int ret, rw_type = (mode == FMODE_WRITE) ? WRITE : READ;
>>>         if (unlikely(!file || !(file->f_mode & mode)))
>>>           return -EBADF;
>>> @@ -728,7 +728,7 @@ static int io_rw_init_file(struct io_kiocb *req, fmode_t mode)
>>>           req->flags |= io_file_get_flags(file);
>>>         kiocb->ki_flags = file->f_iocb_flags;
>>> -    ret = kiocb_set_rw_flags(kiocb, rw->flags);
>>> +    ret = kiocb_set_rw_flags(kiocb, rw->flags, rw_type);
>>>       if (unlikely(ret))
>>>           return ret;
>>>       kiocb->ki_flags |= IOCB_ALLOC_CACHE;
>> Not sure why you took the lazy way out here rather than just pass it in,
>> now there's another branhc in the hot path. NAK.
> 
> Are you saying to change io_rw_init_file() to this:
> 
> io_rw_init_file(struct io_kiocb *req, fmode_t mode, int rw_type)
> 
> And the callers can hardcode rw_type?

Yep, basically making the change identical to the aio one. Not sure why
you did it differently in those two spots.

-- 
Jens Axboe