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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F919C388F7 for ; Sat, 7 Nov 2020 17:17:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CD8C20878 for ; Sat, 7 Nov 2020 17:17:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="b3urmbbS"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="iGtl9uIV"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="2ui2PMqz" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 0CD8C20878 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kbRpr-0006uS-9C; Sat, 07 Nov 2020 17:17:07 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kbRpp-0006ty-2f for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 07 Nov 2020 17:17:05 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=C4lQpV/c1bF5WWl58x7Te9DBvP/DX6Mdw9Z4cvospjY=; b=b3urmbbSPSgP8avdkyHS+cC1xs 6hck8vD6qalPp7MB4l5TqvEhrLmBBpaUD0Lagf7cXf5NjHvfZl6q2Tn5xbVi+SQhIZ8sbwrgL3Dta hYBPrOzPQRm2dAVUI+R17lkr9alk6mk9o/XWua1T1XS6wWoyO5FOIQAzgxh5sXsIl658=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To :From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=C4lQpV/c1bF5WWl58x7Te9DBvP/DX6Mdw9Z4cvospjY=; b=iGtl9uIVyTSlIs5VmHBsEoqRbs OUkLvSuD1XwL8QGLnMZaPH7mTmpC9TisGph/OJUDNW6bB2eYQK6tFmLMOL9frpET6JNZX+F0P4GWp JL/4Ulx9igdaAu2eoyhCYs6leWiWB9333muOjjhc7t0IBoE5rr8lmwqj4KsAPc1x/6E0=; Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by sfi-mx-1.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.2) id 1kbRpZ-00CeUE-JL for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 07 Nov 2020 17:17:04 +0000 Received: from sol.localdomain (172-10-235-113.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [172.10.235.113]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DA66920878; Sat, 7 Nov 2020 17:16:36 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1604769397; bh=VMqMnbjzVosHlpvEbYLFq0+HfLfBtdYGJjT4bgAoHwE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=2ui2PMqzN7ca8Nvf247liiW9Wo9Ev9y9RKgduhAAE7ePQEy/9u/ZCaeqZo1TEG3Hn 2ppqn5AxFu2mu8oB0jzJIzyI68sr3m6vuJSfiRrdBbDURRJ9A8biG/YMQZU7a72gAF tudE7+nsHEas5RborIZ10LGVZLpKlJu3BblKxiRA= Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2020 09:16:35 -0800 From: Eric Biggers To: Chao Yu Message-ID: <20201107171635.GA841@sol.localdomain> References: <20201106065331.76236-1-yuchao0@huawei.com> <20201106180324.GA78548@sol.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Headers-End: 1kbRpZ-00CeUE-JL Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v4 2/2] f2fs: fix compat F2FS_IOC_{MOVE, GARBAGE_COLLECT}_RANGE X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: jaegeuk@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Sat, Nov 07, 2020 at 05:25:23PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > On 2020/11/7 2:03, Eric Biggers wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 02:53:31PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > > > +#if defined(__KERNEL__) > > > +struct compat_f2fs_gc_range { > > > + u32 sync; > > > + compat_u64 start; > > > + compat_u64 len; > > > +}; > > > > There's no need to use '#if defined(__KERNEL__)' in kernel source files. > > > > Likewise for compat_f2fs_move_range. > > Correct. > > > > > > +static int f2fs_compat_ioc_gc_range(struct file *file, unsigned long arg) > > > +{ > > > + struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(file_inode(file)); > > > + struct compat_f2fs_gc_range __user *urange; > > > + struct f2fs_gc_range range; > > > + int err; > > > + > > > + if (unlikely(f2fs_cp_error(sbi))) > > > + return -EIO; > > > + if (!f2fs_is_checkpoint_ready(sbi)) > > > + return -ENOSPC; > > > > I still don't understand why this checkpoint-related stuff is getting added > > here, and only to the compat versions of the ioctls. It wasn't in the original > > version. If they are needed then they should be added to __f2fs_ioc_gc_range() > > and __f2fs_ioc_move_range() (preferably by a separate patch) so that they are > > If so, cp-related stuff will be checked redundantly in both f2fs_ioctl() and > __f2fs_ioc_xxx() function for native GC_RANGE and MOVE_RANGE ioctls, it's > not needed. > Oh I see, the cp-related checks are at the beginning of f2fs_ioctl() too. In that case a much better approach would be to add __f2fs_ioctl() which is called by f2fs_ioctl() and f2fs_compat_ioctl(), and have f2fs_ioctl() and f2fs_compat_ioctl() do the cp-related checks but not __f2fs_ioctl(). I feel that's still not entirely correct, because ENOTTY should take precedence over EIO or ENOSPC from the cp-related stuff. But at least it would be consistent between the native and compat ioctls, and the cp-related checks wouldn't have to be duplicated in random ioctls... - Eric _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel