All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/10] iomap: split out iomap check and reset logic from iter advance
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2025 14:48:16 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z6JvACJuZbktb_8X@bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250204193056.GD21808@frogsfrogsfrogs>

On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 11:30:56AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 08:30:36AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> > In preparation for more granular iomap_iter advancing, break out
> > some of the logic associated with higher level iteration from
> > iomap_advance_iter(). Specifically, factor the iomap reset code into
> > a separate helper and lift the iomap.length check into the calling
> > code, similar to how ->iomap_end() calls are handled.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> > ---
> >  fs/iomap/iter.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> >  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/iomap/iter.c b/fs/iomap/iter.c
> > index 3790918646af..731ea7267f27 100644
> > --- a/fs/iomap/iter.c
> > +++ b/fs/iomap/iter.c
> > @@ -7,6 +7,13 @@
> >  #include <linux/iomap.h>
> >  #include "trace.h"
> >  
> > +static inline void iomap_iter_reset_iomap(struct iomap_iter *iter)
> > +{
> > +	iter->processed = 0;
> > +	memset(&iter->iomap, 0, sizeof(iter->iomap));
> > +	memset(&iter->srcmap, 0, sizeof(iter->srcmap));
> > +}
> > +
> >  /*
> >   * Advance to the next range we need to map.
> >   *
> > @@ -14,32 +21,24 @@
> >   * processed - it was aborted because the extent the iomap spanned may have been
> >   * changed during the operation. In this case, the iteration behaviour is to
> >   * remap the unprocessed range of the iter, and that means we may need to remap
> > - * even when we've made no progress (i.e. iter->processed = 0). Hence the
> > - * "finished iterating" case needs to distinguish between
> > - * (processed = 0) meaning we are done and (processed = 0 && stale) meaning we
> > - * need to remap the entire remaining range.
> > + * even when we've made no progress (i.e. count = 0). Hence the "finished
> > + * iterating" case needs to distinguish between (count = 0) meaning we are done
> > + * and (count = 0 && stale) meaning we need to remap the entire remaining range.
> >   */
> > -static inline int iomap_iter_advance(struct iomap_iter *iter)
> > +static inline int iomap_iter_advance(struct iomap_iter *iter, s64 count)
> >  {
> >  	bool stale = iter->iomap.flags & IOMAP_F_STALE;
> >  	int ret = 1;
> >  
> > -	/* handle the previous iteration (if any) */
> > -	if (iter->iomap.length) {
> > -		if (iter->processed < 0)
> > -			return iter->processed;
> > -		if (WARN_ON_ONCE(iter->processed > iomap_length(iter)))
> > -			return -EIO;
> > -		iter->pos += iter->processed;
> > -		iter->len -= iter->processed;
> > -		if (!iter->len || (!iter->processed && !stale))
> > -			ret = 0;
> > -	}
> > +	if (count < 0)
> > +		return count;
> > +	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(count > iomap_length(iter)))
> > +		return -EIO;
> > +	iter->pos += count;
> > +	iter->len -= count;
> > +	if (!iter->len || (!count && !stale))
> > +		ret = 0;
> >  
> > -	/* clear the per iteration state */
> > -	iter->processed = 0;
> > -	memset(&iter->iomap, 0, sizeof(iter->iomap));
> > -	memset(&iter->srcmap, 0, sizeof(iter->srcmap));
> 
> Are there any consequences to not resetting the iter if
> iter->iomap.length is zero?  I think the answer is "no" because callers
> are supposed to initialize the iter with zeroes and filesystems are
> never supposed to return zero-length iomaps from ->begin_iomap, right?
> 

That matches my understanding..

> If the answers are "no" and "yes" then
> Reviewed-by: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
> 

Thanks.

Brian

> --D
> 
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -82,10 +81,14 @@ int iomap_iter(struct iomap_iter *iter, const struct iomap_ops *ops)
> >  			return ret;
> >  	}
> >  
> > +	/* advance and clear state from the previous iteration */
> >  	trace_iomap_iter(iter, ops, _RET_IP_);
> > -	ret = iomap_iter_advance(iter);
> > -	if (ret <= 0)
> > -		return ret;
> > +	if (iter->iomap.length) {
> > +		ret = iomap_iter_advance(iter, iter->processed);
> > +		iomap_iter_reset_iomap(iter);
> > +		if (ret <= 0)
> > +			return ret;
> > +	}
> >  
> >  	ret = ops->iomap_begin(iter->inode, iter->pos, iter->len, iter->flags,
> >  			       &iter->iomap, &iter->srcmap);
> > -- 
> > 2.48.1
> > 
> > 
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2025-02-04 19:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-02-04 13:30 [PATCH v4 00/10] iomap: incremental per-operation iter advance Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 01/10] iomap: factor out iomap length helper Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 02/10] iomap: split out iomap check and reset logic from iter advance Brian Foster
2025-02-04 19:30   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-04 19:48     ` Brian Foster [this message]
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 03/10] iomap: refactor iomap_iter() length check and tracepoint Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:50   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 04/10] iomap: lift error code check out of iomap_iter_advance() Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:51   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-04 19:23   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-04 19:48     ` Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 05/10] iomap: lift iter termination logic from iomap_iter_advance() Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:51   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-04 19:52   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-04 20:15     ` Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 06/10] iomap: export iomap_iter_advance() and return remaining length Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:52   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 07/10] iomap: support incremental iomap_iter advances Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 08/10] iomap: advance the iter directly on buffered writes Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 09/10] iomap: advance the iter directly on unshare range Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 10/10] iomap: advance the iter directly on zero range Brian Foster

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Z6JvACJuZbktb_8X@bfoster \
    --to=bfoster@redhat.com \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.