From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EE73CDE011 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2026 04:30:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4gmjQG2XTKz2yYd; Fri, 26 Jun 2026 14:30:14 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=213.95.11.211 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1782448214; cv=none; b=MSGQOglegkENp/2e1NrRKbRBqnEa5+1M73CP2QSPRmHJMIby65G2SIRBey3bXfheA7ENAyu/rk9/okF/ELUlpsYvCYavqMLLhbNTCyu5YrrER0FQfnPLRzN/ZBCzteQsWJ3hn2q0MyQmeoJVVlo6IKhZp5dHD/UnEg7oaKCJABD6rslIE8yagUJukMIegFgwD/b9xKmfJcqry8T2R11ZiD0sMOaZuHQUh6ri4kVLCAiB4fc253rYXD8wqY23G7YoRRAEk0jw8T5glGhPCvRcgniYzD1HXHPDZA27QLoIu40pc81vmNXKemIQvuMuIclXs+Nk8W3Wpk6YDiJ3txzO8A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1782448214; c=relaxed/relaxed; bh=2uvhb3zm4kPVUkIzWb5T3Cc199RzjAm0jrmzp6qhilg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=e/rBw5JiciFMuJhWUtJQ90g5oMCZRly/AnJqhSKEx6XvtUOpRP0MipwY9OGEo0sYKjUmBYgS24XyNXUmxxZ1pHCQllxPrYekYNoUIX7JkYRKvC38QdZl3XTc+lOK3qVf5EzDR2oq4i3cRCKdoxwab7sA4NhRJTIX10ZviOqCRJWq0yxEYBGC3koJ3Ga5pDb0n582uLyuH+bbRQzGRMXoniXVX5d1VWJFhK3rQSfU06bFxfVQuhaO6kNsll5USYjPRggt8SpyezBFG/yBLmjfpskhHRqrMWvwGowfF6SjGUAs4gP+odvzgoxQcAdcslBYSlzzfuh0GJ59nkJtnAWBLA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de; spf=pass (client-ip=213.95.11.211; helo=verein.lst.de; envelope-from=hch@lst.de; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) smtp.mailfrom=lst.de Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=lst.de (client-ip=213.95.11.211; helo=verein.lst.de; envelope-from=hch@lst.de; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4gmjQF1179z2yVv for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2026 14:30:11 +1000 (AEST) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 0259B68BEB; Fri, 26 Jun 2026 06:30:03 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2026 06:30:03 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Christian Brauner , Kelu Ye , Yifan Zhao , Ritesh Harjani , Joanne Koong , Namjae Jeon , Sungjong Seo , Hyunchul Lee , Konstantin Komarov , Miklos Szeredi , fuse-devel@lists.linux.dev, ntfs3@lists.linux.dev, linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] iomap: consolidate bio submission Message-ID: <20260626043003.GA8078@lst.de> References: <20260625120803.2462291-1-hch@lst.de> <20260625120803.2462291-2-hch@lst.de> <20260625172740.GD6078@frogsfrogsfrogs> X-Mailing-List: linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , , List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260625172740.GD6078@frogsfrogsfrogs> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 10:27:40AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > > + bio->bi_end_io = end_io; > > if (iter->iomap.flags & IOMAP_F_INTEGRITY) > > fs_bio_integrity_alloc(bio); > > Ah, so the bug here is that all the pagecache readers should have been > allocating integrity information for the bio before submitting it? Well, all the ones that set IOMAP_F_INTEGRITY, which really is just XFS at the momen. And because if the iomap refactoring for fuse XFS is now using it's own submit callback and does not get it.. > And > because it doesn't, iomap_finish_ioend won't do the read verification? Yeah. > So the block layer does it for us, and that's why we don't use the ioend > chaining? And (I guess) the future userspace interface won't have any > means to get at the integrity data? Yeah.