linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/10] iomap: split out iomap check and reset logic from iter advance
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2025 14:48:16 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z6JvACJuZbktb_8X@bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250204193056.GD21808@frogsfrogsfrogs>

On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 11:30:56AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 08:30:36AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> > In preparation for more granular iomap_iter advancing, break out
> > some of the logic associated with higher level iteration from
> > iomap_advance_iter(). Specifically, factor the iomap reset code into
> > a separate helper and lift the iomap.length check into the calling
> > code, similar to how ->iomap_end() calls are handled.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> > ---
> >  fs/iomap/iter.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> >  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/iomap/iter.c b/fs/iomap/iter.c
> > index 3790918646af..731ea7267f27 100644
> > --- a/fs/iomap/iter.c
> > +++ b/fs/iomap/iter.c
> > @@ -7,6 +7,13 @@
> >  #include <linux/iomap.h>
> >  #include "trace.h"
> >  
> > +static inline void iomap_iter_reset_iomap(struct iomap_iter *iter)
> > +{
> > +	iter->processed = 0;
> > +	memset(&iter->iomap, 0, sizeof(iter->iomap));
> > +	memset(&iter->srcmap, 0, sizeof(iter->srcmap));
> > +}
> > +
> >  /*
> >   * Advance to the next range we need to map.
> >   *
> > @@ -14,32 +21,24 @@
> >   * processed - it was aborted because the extent the iomap spanned may have been
> >   * changed during the operation. In this case, the iteration behaviour is to
> >   * remap the unprocessed range of the iter, and that means we may need to remap
> > - * even when we've made no progress (i.e. iter->processed = 0). Hence the
> > - * "finished iterating" case needs to distinguish between
> > - * (processed = 0) meaning we are done and (processed = 0 && stale) meaning we
> > - * need to remap the entire remaining range.
> > + * even when we've made no progress (i.e. count = 0). Hence the "finished
> > + * iterating" case needs to distinguish between (count = 0) meaning we are done
> > + * and (count = 0 && stale) meaning we need to remap the entire remaining range.
> >   */
> > -static inline int iomap_iter_advance(struct iomap_iter *iter)
> > +static inline int iomap_iter_advance(struct iomap_iter *iter, s64 count)
> >  {
> >  	bool stale = iter->iomap.flags & IOMAP_F_STALE;
> >  	int ret = 1;
> >  
> > -	/* handle the previous iteration (if any) */
> > -	if (iter->iomap.length) {
> > -		if (iter->processed < 0)
> > -			return iter->processed;
> > -		if (WARN_ON_ONCE(iter->processed > iomap_length(iter)))
> > -			return -EIO;
> > -		iter->pos += iter->processed;
> > -		iter->len -= iter->processed;
> > -		if (!iter->len || (!iter->processed && !stale))
> > -			ret = 0;
> > -	}
> > +	if (count < 0)
> > +		return count;
> > +	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(count > iomap_length(iter)))
> > +		return -EIO;
> > +	iter->pos += count;
> > +	iter->len -= count;
> > +	if (!iter->len || (!count && !stale))
> > +		ret = 0;
> >  
> > -	/* clear the per iteration state */
> > -	iter->processed = 0;
> > -	memset(&iter->iomap, 0, sizeof(iter->iomap));
> > -	memset(&iter->srcmap, 0, sizeof(iter->srcmap));
> 
> Are there any consequences to not resetting the iter if
> iter->iomap.length is zero?  I think the answer is "no" because callers
> are supposed to initialize the iter with zeroes and filesystems are
> never supposed to return zero-length iomaps from ->begin_iomap, right?
> 

That matches my understanding..

> If the answers are "no" and "yes" then
> Reviewed-by: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
> 

Thanks.

Brian

> --D
> 
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -82,10 +81,14 @@ int iomap_iter(struct iomap_iter *iter, const struct iomap_ops *ops)
> >  			return ret;
> >  	}
> >  
> > +	/* advance and clear state from the previous iteration */
> >  	trace_iomap_iter(iter, ops, _RET_IP_);
> > -	ret = iomap_iter_advance(iter);
> > -	if (ret <= 0)
> > -		return ret;
> > +	if (iter->iomap.length) {
> > +		ret = iomap_iter_advance(iter, iter->processed);
> > +		iomap_iter_reset_iomap(iter);
> > +		if (ret <= 0)
> > +			return ret;
> > +	}
> >  
> >  	ret = ops->iomap_begin(iter->inode, iter->pos, iter->len, iter->flags,
> >  			       &iter->iomap, &iter->srcmap);
> > -- 
> > 2.48.1
> > 
> > 
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2025-02-04 19:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-02-04 13:30 [PATCH v4 00/10] iomap: incremental per-operation iter advance Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 01/10] iomap: factor out iomap length helper Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 02/10] iomap: split out iomap check and reset logic from iter advance Brian Foster
2025-02-04 19:30   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-04 19:48     ` Brian Foster [this message]
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 03/10] iomap: refactor iomap_iter() length check and tracepoint Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:50   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 04/10] iomap: lift error code check out of iomap_iter_advance() Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:51   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-04 19:23   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-04 19:48     ` Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 05/10] iomap: lift iter termination logic from iomap_iter_advance() Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:51   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-04 19:52   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-04 20:15     ` Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 06/10] iomap: export iomap_iter_advance() and return remaining length Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:52   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 07/10] iomap: support incremental iomap_iter advances Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 08/10] iomap: advance the iter directly on buffered writes Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 09/10] iomap: advance the iter directly on unshare range Brian Foster
2025-02-04 13:30 ` [PATCH v4 10/10] iomap: advance the iter directly on zero range Brian Foster

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=Z6JvACJuZbktb_8X@bfoster \
    --to=bfoster@redhat.com \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@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).