linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Mike Marshall <hubcap@omnibond.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC] what's going on with file->f_pos uses in orangefs_file_write_iter()?
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 22:26:10 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171207222610.GH21978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)

I'd missed that back then, but...

        if (file->f_pos > i_size_read(file->f_mapping->host))
                orangefs_i_size_write(file->f_mapping->host, file->f_pos);

        rc = generic_write_checks(iocb, iter);

        if (rc <= 0) {
                gossip_err("%s: generic_write_checks failed, rc:%zd:.\n",
                           __func__, rc);
                goto out;
        }

        /*
         * if we are appending, generic_write_checks would have updated
         * pos to the end of the file, so we will wait till now to set
         * pos...
         */
        pos = *(&iocb->ki_pos);

looks suspicious as hell.  What's going on there?  Not to mention anything
else file->f_pos might be completely unrelated to any IO going on -
consider e.g. pwrite(2), where the position (in iocb->ki_pos) has nothing
to do with file->f_pos.  Then there's the question of WTF is write()
(or pwrite()) past the current EOF doing bumping the file size, before
it even gets a chance to decide whether it'll be trying to do any IO at
all.

_Then_ there's the deadlock on 32bit SMP in that code.  Look: several
lines prior we'd done
        inode_lock(file->f_mapping->host);
and hadn't unlocked the sucker since then.  And
static inline void orangefs_i_size_write(struct inode *inode, loff_t i_size)
{
#if BITS_PER_LONG == 32 && defined(CONFIG_SMP)
        inode_lock(inode);
#endif
        i_size_write(inode, i_size);
#if BITS_PER_LONG == 32 && defined(CONFIG_SMP)
        inode_unlock(inode);
#endif
}
means that if we get around to calling it there in SMP/32bit case, we'll
get as plain a deadlock as possible.  And AFAICS it had been that way
since the initial merge.

What the hell is that code about and what is it trying to do?

PS: While we are at it, what's the point of that *(&...) in there?

             reply	other threads:[~2017-12-07 22:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-12-07 22:26 Al Viro [this message]
2017-12-08 16:39 ` [RFC] what's going on with file->f_pos uses in orangefs_file_write_iter()? martin
2017-12-12 16:31   ` Mike Marshall

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=20171207222610.GH21978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    --to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=hubcap@omnibond.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).