From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] struct fd situation
Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 17:30:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240531163045.GA1916035@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240531031802.GA1629371@ZenIV>
On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 04:18:02AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> Alternative would be to turn struct fd into a struct-wrapped unsigned long
> and either use a flag for emptiness checks (we can steal more from the
> pointer) or just compare with zero for empitness check.
>
> The former might allow to represent specific errors, which would give a neat
> solution for ovl_real_fd() calling conventions - instead of "return an error,
> fill user-supplied struct fd" it could just return an error-representing
> struct fd and be done with that.
>
> Unfortunately, gcc optimizer really stinks when it comes to bitops -
[snip]
> That example is very close to what we'd need if fd_empty() turned
> into checking a flag. So unless somebody has a clever scheme that
> would avoid that kind of fun, this is probably no-go.
>
> If we give up on representing errors, we can use 0 for empty.
Hmm... FWIW, we could do something like this:
fd: 0 for empty, (unsigned long)p | flags, with p being an address of struct file
fd_err: a non-zero value possible for fd or (unsigned long)-E... for an error.
The range of valid values for fd does not overlap with
(unsigned long)-MAX_ERRNO..(unsigned long)-1
since that would require IS_ERR(p) to be true and if we ever had that for
an address of some object, we would have worse problems.
That would be something along the lines of
#define fd_file(f) (struct file *)((f).word & ~3)
static inline bool fd_empty(struct fd f)
{
return unlikely(!f.word);
}
static inline void fdput(struct fd f)
{
if (f.word & FDPUT_FPUT)
fput(fd_file(f));
}
static inline bool __must_check FD_IS_ERR(struct fd_err f)
{
return IS_ERR_VALUE(f.word);
}
static inline void fdput_err(struct fd_err f)
{
if (!FD_IS_ERR(f))
fdput((struct fd){f.word});
}
static inline long __must_check FD_ERR(struct fd_err f)
{
return (long)fd.word;
}
That's basically the difference between "pointer to object or NULL" and
"pointer to object or ERR_PTR()", only with distinguishable types for
those...
Interesting... So we get something like
static inline struct fd_err file_fd_err(struct file *f, bool is_cloned)
{
if (IS_ERR(f))
return (struct fd_err){PTR_ERR(f)};
else
return (struct fd_err){(unsigned long)f | is_cloned};
}
(or, perhaps, file_fd_cloned and file_fd_borrowed, to get rid of
'is_cloned' argument in public API; need to play around a bit and
see what works better - the interesting part is what the constructor
for struct fd would look like)
with
static struct fd_err ovl_real_fdget_meta(const struct file *file, bool allow_meta)
{
struct dentry *dentry = file_dentry(file);
struct path realpath;
int err;
if (allow_meta) {
ovl_path_real(dentry, &realpath);
} else {
/* lazy lookup and verify of lowerdata */
err = ovl_verify_lowerdata(dentry);
if (err)
return file_fd_err(ERR_PTR(err), false);
ovl_path_realdata(dentry, &realpath);
}
if (!realpath.dentry)
return file_fd_err(ERR_PTR(-EIO), false);
/* Has it been copied up since we'd opened it? */
if (unlikely(file_inode(real->file) != d_inode(realpath.dentry)))
return file_fd_err(ovl_open_realfile(file, &realpath), true);
/* Did the flags change since open? */
if (unlikely((file->f_flags ^ real->file->f_flags) & ~OVL_OPEN_FLAGS)) {
err = ovl_change_flags(real->file, file->f_flags);
if (err)
return file_fd_err(ERR_PTR(err), false);
}
return file_fd_err(file->private_data, false);
}
static struct fd_err ovl_real_fdget(const struct file *file)
{
if (d_is_dir(file_dentry(file)))
return file_fd_err(ovl_dir_real_file(file, false), false);
return ovl_real_fdget_meta(file, false);
}
with callers looking like
real = ovl_real_fdget(file);
if (FD_IS_ERR(real))
return FD_ERR(real);
do stuff, using fd_file(real)
fdput_err(real);
with possibility of __cleanup() use, since fdput_err() on
early failure exit would be a no-op.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-31 16:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-31 3:18 [RFC] struct fd situation Al Viro
2024-05-31 16:30 ` Al Viro [this message]
2024-05-31 16:40 ` Al Viro
2024-05-31 18:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-05-31 22:01 ` Al Viro
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=20240531163045.GA1916035@ZenIV \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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