From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08B0F1F9A91 for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2025 22:13:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1742336036; cv=none; b=ik209ntRyt2eii0QnLkyhVRFbAyq2fwPlgo9zu+TuWDcfYHZhfLsCgrSQf8pMquCuqa6CTmKlFvByNU9N6GKYfgDKpn1F8uEP53A8mfNtAigPwmErHu6e4dDLajs3Mqj4Mj9wlWnMXbj/gTeZIzx9BmNQcrZYwyAsymoAhtk9Ro= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1742336036; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+GT7xTCoAxdd7TaqB8aFZCSz0X4+G43xmplubN02gas=; h=From:In-Reply-To:References:To:Cc:Subject:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Date:Message-ID; b=MU07VzpDG/07bxGhpeXYwZAX4WNihe/FZGBn6xwZgiq8zxCJQUVWT0aTv4whndHd6hfRwH7ZJDKrrP5zseogb0ZZkWKRSPWfsvOmtWR5Cn7CZqQBB9PdYxvGntC70tTzgX254EhsG0dTbVPT5Av1YeJs8/Rick9Q1tDUaS0E67Y= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=aCVeMb2r; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="aCVeMb2r" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1742336034; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=o+GFAiir4R3bujMXcWPgCyvMMm2RkMwRgEUEGWcFBco=; b=aCVeMb2rjsOb/F3VFhCIwTIRIoX7hmWg1qiCT+hw9hpu0abLBdV2txyddTnE35AUXeEOBt NCKoONF/6ZWkBFNy6Ye4QbGgdi0Ob6gM/T8CysHEXSnTnJwAmWCoIg6CV4ptX6B1KW5poG m00rxDuvt3BUHCckbRgti8K2huVfR6k= Received: from mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-65-2O6T27d7McenMk_496jj5A-1; Tue, 18 Mar 2025 18:13:49 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 2O6T27d7McenMk_496jj5A-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: 2O6T27d7McenMk_496jj5A_1742336028 Received: from mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.12]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6847E18004A9; Tue, 18 Mar 2025 22:13:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from warthog.procyon.org.uk (unknown [10.42.28.61]) by mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13E7719560AD; Tue, 18 Mar 2025 22:13:44 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <639bd030acc938dc3ef1d11fe630c03e3effd24d.camel@ibm.com> References: <639bd030acc938dc3ef1d11fe630c03e3effd24d.camel@ibm.com> <20250313233341.1675324-1-dhowells@redhat.com> <20250313233341.1675324-14-dhowells@redhat.com> To: Viacheslav Dubeyko Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Alex Markuze , "slava@dubeyko.com" , "dongsheng.yang@easystack.cn" , Xiubo Li , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "jlayton@kernel.org" , "idryomov@gmail.com" , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 13/35] rbd: Switch from using bvec_iter to iov_iter Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2680457.1742336023.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 22:13:43 +0000 Message-ID: <2680458.1742336023@warthog.procyon.org.uk> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.12 Viacheslav Dubeyko wrote: > > + list_for_each_entry(ex, object_extents, oe_item) { > > + if (ex->oe_objno =3D=3D objno && > = > OK. I see the point that objno should be the same. > = > > + ex->oe_off <=3D objoff && > = > But why ex->oe_off could be lesser than objoff? The objoff could be not = exactly > the same? > = > > + ex->oe_off + ex->oe_len >=3D objoff + xlen) /* paranoia */ > = > Do we really need in this comment? :) > = > I am still guessing why ex->oe_off + ex->oe_len could be bigger than obj= off + > xlen. Is it possible that object size or offset could be bigger? Look further on in the patch. The code is preexisting, just moved a bit. My guess is that we're looking at data from the server so it *has* to be sanity chacked before we can trust it. David