[PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: set O_LARGEFILE in __create_shmem()

[PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: set O_LARGEFILE in __create_shmem()

[陈涛涛 Taotao Chen]

From: Taotao Chen <chentaotao@didiglobal.com>

Without O_LARGEFILE, file->f_op->write_iter calls
generic_write_check_limits(), which enforces a 2GB (MAX_NON_LFS) limit,
causing -EFBIG on large writes.

In shmem_pwrite(), this error is later masked as -EIO due to the error
handling order, leading to igt failures like gen9_exec_parse(bb-large).

Set O_LARGEFILE in __create_shmem() to prevent -EFBIG on large writes.

Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202508081029.343192ec-lkp@intel.com
Fixes: 048832a3f400 ("drm/i915: Refactor shmem_pwrite() to use kiocb and write_iter")
Signed-off-by: Taotao Chen <chentaotao@didiglobal.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
index e3d188455f67..2b53aad915f5 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
@@ -514,6 +514,11 @@ static int __create_shmem(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
 	if (IS_ERR(filp))
 		return PTR_ERR(filp);
 
+	/*
+	 * Prevent -EFBIG by allowing large writes beyond MAX_NON_LFS on shmem
+	 * objects by setting O_LARGEFILE.
+	 */
+	filp->f_flags |= O_LARGEFILE;
 	obj->filp = filp;
 	return 0;
 }
-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Fix incorrect error handling in shmem_pwrite()

[陈涛涛 Taotao Chen]

From: Taotao Chen <chentaotao@didiglobal.com>

shmem_pwrite() currently checks for short writes before negative error
codes, which can overwrite real errors (e.g., -EFBIG) with -EIO.
Reorder the checks to return negative errors first, then handle short
writes.

Fixes: 048832a3f400 ("drm/i915: Refactor shmem_pwrite() to use kiocb and write_iter")
Signed-off-by: Taotao Chen <chentaotao@didiglobal.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
index 2b53aad915f5..702532eef207 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
@@ -441,12 +441,12 @@ shmem_pwrite(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
 	written = file->f_op->write_iter(&kiocb, &iter);
 	BUG_ON(written == -EIOCBQUEUED);
 
-	if (written != size)
-		return -EIO;
-
 	if (written < 0)
 		return written;
 
+	if (written != size)
+		return -EIO;
+
 	return 0;
 }
 
-- 
2.34.1

✗ LGCI.VerificationFailed: failure for series starting with [1/2] drm/i915: set O_LARGEFILE in __create_shmem()

[Patchwork]

== Series Details ==

Series: series starting with [1/2] drm/i915: set O_LARGEFILE in __create_shmem()
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/152763/
State : failure

== Summary ==

Address 'chentaotao@didiglobal.com' is not on the allowlist, which prevents CI from being triggered for this patch.
If you want Intel GFX CI to accept this address, please contact the script maintainers at i915-ci-infra@lists.freedesktop.org.
Exception occurred during validation, bailing out!

Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: set O_LARGEFILE in __create_shmem()

[Rodrigo Vivi]

On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 09:30:55AM +0000, 陈涛涛 Taotao Chen wrote:
> From: Taotao Chen <chentaotao@didiglobal.com>
> 
> Without O_LARGEFILE, file->f_op->write_iter calls
> generic_write_check_limits(), which enforces a 2GB (MAX_NON_LFS) limit,
> causing -EFBIG on large writes.
> 
> In shmem_pwrite(), this error is later masked as -EIO due to the error
> handling order, leading to igt failures like gen9_exec_parse(bb-large).
> 
> Set O_LARGEFILE in __create_shmem() to prevent -EFBIG on large writes.
> 
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202508081029.343192ec-lkp@intel.com
> Fixes: 048832a3f400 ("drm/i915: Refactor shmem_pwrite() to use kiocb and write_iter")
> Signed-off-by: Taotao Chen <chentaotao@didiglobal.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> index e3d188455f67..2b53aad915f5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> @@ -514,6 +514,11 @@ static int __create_shmem(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>  	if (IS_ERR(filp))
>  		return PTR_ERR(filp);
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * Prevent -EFBIG by allowing large writes beyond MAX_NON_LFS on shmem
> +	 * objects by setting O_LARGEFILE.
> +	 */
> +	filp->f_flags |= O_LARGEFILE;

honest question, is it safe to set this here unconditionally?

Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>

>  	obj->filp = filp;
>  	return 0;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Fix incorrect error handling in shmem_pwrite()

[Rodrigo Vivi]

On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 09:31:00AM +0000, 陈涛涛 Taotao Chen wrote:
> From: Taotao Chen <chentaotao@didiglobal.com>
> 
> shmem_pwrite() currently checks for short writes before negative error
> codes, which can overwrite real errors (e.g., -EFBIG) with -EIO.
> Reorder the checks to return negative errors first, then handle short
> writes.
> 
> Fixes: 048832a3f400 ("drm/i915: Refactor shmem_pwrite() to use kiocb and write_iter")
> Signed-off-by: Taotao Chen <chentaotao@didiglobal.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> index 2b53aad915f5..702532eef207 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> @@ -441,12 +441,12 @@ shmem_pwrite(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
>  	written = file->f_op->write_iter(&kiocb, &iter);
>  	BUG_ON(written == -EIOCBQUEUED);
>  
> -	if (written != size)
> -		return -EIO;
> -
>  	if (written < 0)
>  		return written;
>  
> +	if (written != size)
> +		return -EIO;

That's awkward...

I mean, you are right that we cannot overwrite what is returned from the
write_iter function. But perhaps this != check here should be before?

Or it at least deserves a comment in the code telling what's the intent
here. why != size is -EIO... but it was already written :/

> +
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -- 
> 2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Fix incorrect error handling in shmem_pwrite()

[Andi Shyti]

Hi Rodrigo,

...

> > @@ -441,12 +441,12 @@ shmem_pwrite(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
> >  	written = file->f_op->write_iter(&kiocb, &iter);
> >  	BUG_ON(written == -EIOCBQUEUED);
> >  
> > -	if (written != size)
> > -		return -EIO;
> > -
> >  	if (written < 0)
> >  		return written;
> >  
> > +	if (written != size)
> > +		return -EIO;
> 
> That's awkward...
> 
> I mean, you are right that we cannot overwrite what is returned from the
> write_iter function. But perhaps this != check here should be before?
> 
> Or it at least deserves a comment in the code telling what's the intent
> here. why != size is -EIO... but it was already written :/

The check (written < 0) is completely useless after (written !=
size), so that I think the patch is correct.

Andi

> > +
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> >  
> > -- 
> > 2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Fix incorrect error handling in shmem_pwrite()

[Andi Shyti]

Hi Taotao,

On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 09:31:00AM +0000, 陈涛涛 Taotao Chen wrote:
> From: Taotao Chen <chentaotao@didiglobal.com>
> 
> shmem_pwrite() currently checks for short writes before negative error
> codes, which can overwrite real errors (e.g., -EFBIG) with -EIO.
> Reorder the checks to return negative errors first, then handle short
> writes.
> 
> Fixes: 048832a3f400 ("drm/i915: Refactor shmem_pwrite() to use kiocb and write_iter")

I don't think we need the Fixes: tag here, in any case we return
an error and -EIO is somehow correct.

With the Fixes removed:

Reviewed-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>

Andi

> Signed-off-by: Taotao Chen <chentaotao@didiglobal.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> index 2b53aad915f5..702532eef207 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> @@ -441,12 +441,12 @@ shmem_pwrite(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
>  	written = file->f_op->write_iter(&kiocb, &iter);
>  	BUG_ON(written == -EIOCBQUEUED);
>  
> -	if (written != size)
> -		return -EIO;
> -
>  	if (written < 0)
>  		return written;
>  
> +	if (written != size)
> +		return -EIO;
> +
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -- 
> 2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: set O_LARGEFILE in __create_shmem()

[Andi Shyti]

Hi Taotao,

> Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202508081029.343192ec-lkp@intel.com

...

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> index e3d188455f67..2b53aad915f5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> @@ -514,6 +514,11 @@ static int __create_shmem(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>  	if (IS_ERR(filp))
>  		return PTR_ERR(filp);
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * Prevent -EFBIG by allowing large writes beyond MAX_NON_LFS on shmem
> +	 * objects by setting O_LARGEFILE.
> +	 */
> +	filp->f_flags |= O_LARGEFILE;

I don't have anything against this, but is it really fixing the
issue? I thought that O_LARGEFILE is ignored in 64 bit machines,
while here the failure is happening in 64 bit machines.

Besides, where do you see in the LKP logs the -EFBIG error
message?

Andi

>  	obj->filp = filp;
>  	return 0;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: set O_LARGEFILE in __create_shmem()

[陈涛涛 Taotao Chen]

From: Taotao Chen <chentaotao@didiglobal.com>

Hi Andi,

> Hi Taotao,
> 
>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202508081029.343192ec-lkp@intel.com
>
> ...
> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
>> index e3d188455f67..2b53aad915f5 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
>> @@ -514,6 +514,11 @@ static int __create_shmem(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>>  	if (IS_ERR(filp))
>>  		return PTR_ERR(filp);
>>  
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Prevent -EFBIG by allowing large writes beyond MAX_NON_LFS on shmem
>> +	 * objects by setting O_LARGEFILE.
>> +	 */
>> +	filp->f_flags |= O_LARGEFILE;
>
> I don't have anything against this, but is it really fixing the
> issue? I thought that O_LARGEFILE is ignored in 64 bit machines,
> while here the failure is happening in 64 bit machines.

As mentioned in the commit body, without O_LARGEFILE, file->f_op->write_iter
calls generic_write_check_limits(), which enforces the 2GB (MAX_NON_LFS) limit
and causes -EFBIG on large writes.

On 64-bit systems O_LARGEFILE is still set when opening files (e.g. via open()),
so we also need to set it here for shmem objects created inside the kernel.

However, on older 32-bit systems, setting O_LARGEFILE unconditionally may be risky.
Previously I did not check this, but to reduce the risk a safer approach is to wrap
it in a check, for example:

+	if (force_o_largefile())
+		filp->f_flags |= O_LARGEFILE;

>
> Besides, where do you see in the LKP logs the -EFBIG error
> message?
>

Due to the previous return order in shmem_pwrite(), this -EFBIG was being overwritten
by -EIO on short writes. This issue will be fixed in PATCH 2/2.

Taotao

> Andi
>
>>  	obj->filp = filp;
>>  	return 0;
>>  }
>> -- 
>> 2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: set O_LARGEFILE in __create_shmem()

[Andi Shyti]

Hi Taotao,

...

> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> >> index e3d188455f67..2b53aad915f5 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_shmem.c
> >> @@ -514,6 +514,11 @@ static int __create_shmem(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
> >>  	if (IS_ERR(filp))
> >>  		return PTR_ERR(filp);
> >>  
> >> +	/*
> >> +	 * Prevent -EFBIG by allowing large writes beyond MAX_NON_LFS on shmem
> >> +	 * objects by setting O_LARGEFILE.
> >> +	 */
> >> +	filp->f_flags |= O_LARGEFILE;
> >
> > I don't have anything against this, but is it really fixing the
> > issue? I thought that O_LARGEFILE is ignored in 64 bit machines,
> > while here the failure is happening in 64 bit machines.
> 
> As mentioned in the commit body, without O_LARGEFILE, file->f_op->write_iter
> calls generic_write_check_limits(), which enforces the 2GB (MAX_NON_LFS) limit
> and causes -EFBIG on large writes.
> 
> On 64-bit systems O_LARGEFILE is still set when opening files (e.g. via open()),
> so we also need to set it here for shmem objects created inside the kernel.
> 
> However, on older 32-bit systems, setting O_LARGEFILE unconditionally may be risky.
> Previously I did not check this, but to reduce the risk a safer approach is to wrap
> it in a check, for example:
> 
> +	if (force_o_largefile())
> +		filp->f_flags |= O_LARGEFILE;

Ack!

> > Besides, where do you see in the LKP logs the -EFBIG error
> > message?
> >
> 
> Due to the previous return order in shmem_pwrite(), this -EFBIG was being overwritten
> by -EIO on short writes. This issue will be fixed in PATCH 2/2.

Yes, correct :-)

Thanks,
Andi