From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 747002FC87B; Fri, 17 Oct 2025 17:14:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760721277; cv=none; b=ozjwhYZ9lIxmVz1FATArly9vecNGM0Jpae/VT0LDishOLiKbUCIfVEGk8zXRW1iaTZGJVcI8ZFifXO3rMUt9qWMInuoyxPzBQP2V3Bt+yoPHuDT240lAbkVUuF0UY8wIhRwMr/7jxNOdIok84VtWOrefyd5kuW916BnxWmYD4cI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760721277; c=relaxed/simple; bh=UgMbgWeM3gQDgIvQAVcV3tWWYn4I7W18QTSJrtQtsz8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=H/cos3GswHge/UijEOdJcnBUAE9kI869wv7gNUXXq1bXNEGkKnzUka/6EahI13DuMbuHNxI0CiP1cD5H5oAOr8DReQUvn9DGwFcyu+SIIm/HSygKLB7R5L3xOxQwteGg+DKZMuRBPsthgPP+QLorhHTXdrAytJ9/ju7+uN8/f/M= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=k7QNxodB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="k7QNxodB" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; 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; bh=fydJPMy/8eXN/HfxrYX/ccnK/kRSfy8GG0DyRBEqDRQ=; b=k7QNxodB8nfdc2ZSfMTg0+DVHw vG8HF4WN3F3TEFU6DIoc/7u92XhZcqLWj/S2yTLBo/4tLSrjB7sCcN0DpUOtKtYSg7t3Y2ilkIQzb mR5HYxeKefygr+/yAR0hO5BGqWCPfZHn3LEoWWDGLmRBRzRipfpanNhc8D0ydeEFP1asHvMmVtw/Q e9dFAFz8JmupuvykpqSXSHtPLRS916xRT+6pGZeUCR0UdjDWcl4kbfNNy58NtE7+2AFRL0atJzNHz 4i6Iz/rGQTnf0rbMH4GbUWW72rL/rs0Mi1f3HyFwBqTizDygCFAR5DuM7vw0jKI0Q4676fzbvyoZl 1USTEZoQ==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1v9o26-0000000G9ol-0rW2; Fri, 17 Oct 2025 17:14:26 +0000 Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2025 18:14:26 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Kiryl Shutsemau Cc: Dave Chinner , "Darrick J. Wong" , Luis Chamberlain , Pankaj Raghav , Zorro Lang , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm , linux-fsdevel , xfs Subject: Re: Regression in generic/749 with 8k fsblock size on 6.18-rc1 Message-ID: References: <20251014175214.GW6188@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20251015175726.GC6188@frogsfrogsfrogs> <764hf2tqj56revschjgubi2vbqaewjjs5b6ht7v4et4if5irio@arwintd3pfaf> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <764hf2tqj56revschjgubi2vbqaewjjs5b6ht7v4et4if5irio@arwintd3pfaf> On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 03:28:32PM +0100, Kiryl Shutsemau wrote: > If we solved problem of zeroing upto PAGE_SIZE border, I don't see > why zeroing upto folio_size() border any conceptually different. > Might require some bug squeezing, sure. I'm travelling right now and don't want to dig my way through the POSIX spec to lawyer about this. Last time I looked at this problem, I came away convinced that it was a POSIX requirement that page faults beyond the page which contains EOF must signal. Even if not, it's a QoI issue and we've invested significant effort keeping this guarantee. Please just fix the bug.