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=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 9D72AC433DF for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 03:31:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 776AE20674 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 03:31:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1594351863; bh=ILavezJ1kqmIAMle7McKsxU2p5mV+aIXAmscvoxnkMI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=Zeu3FrVynjJjLcgdnSdZ2w250o0oQbMi1fTo7tZHjJ4r784fBuy6tTB219Ys5BflH Yz4XFr9O7qnJjsIkqI1MYL7CXUXnrGpGsjwUfzLtg3owl/41Iygts3WZfZMCTF+FNE Tv61Q4TF9/DtaDoHuzUlJJp1qCQp0/OTeY01Lq+M= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727082AbgGJDbC (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jul 2020 23:31:02 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:55616 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726495AbgGJDbB (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jul 2020 23:31:01 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [104.132.1.66]) (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 4531C2065C; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 03:31:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1594351861; bh=ILavezJ1kqmIAMle7McKsxU2p5mV+aIXAmscvoxnkMI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=CkHIPNE8U17BHuDs91m8OGWElFvGmzeK7I5hBmt8C3ewaBgRSVyGEu80dXF4PBAuT tMwio2MeKkFz3jw/0NzxhG2ZCJpiJ+E7Y43hLe5+lGNM2Ld7MZN7E2GcMaOxjr1Gv8 Bn1IKACaBsGiPVdCiwW3O7nqr75PIsdc8XuPcyms= Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 20:31:00 -0700 From: Jaegeuk Kim To: Chao Yu Cc: Daeho Jeong , Daeho Jeong , kernel-team@android.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: change the way of handling range.len in F2FS_IOC_SEC_TRIM_FILE Message-ID: <20200710033100.GE545837@google.com> References: <20200710021505.2405872-1-daeho43@gmail.com> <20200710030246.GA545837@google.com> <62c9dd7a-5d18-8bb6-8e43-c055fcff51cc@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <62c9dd7a-5d18-8bb6-8e43-c055fcff51cc@huawei.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/10, Chao Yu wrote: > On 2020/7/10 11:02, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > On 07/10, Daeho Jeong wrote: > >> From: Daeho Jeong > >> > >> Changed the way of handling range.len of F2FS_IOC_SEC_TRIM_FILE. > >> 1. Added -1 value support for range.len to signify the end of file. > >> 2. If the end of the range passes over the end of file, it means until > >> the end of file. > >> 3. ignored the case of that range.len is zero to prevent the function > >> from making end_addr zero and triggering different behaviour of > >> the function. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Daeho Jeong > >> --- > >> fs/f2fs/file.c | 16 +++++++--------- > >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/file.c b/fs/f2fs/file.c > >> index 368c80f8e2a1..1c4601f99326 100644 > >> --- a/fs/f2fs/file.c > >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/file.c > >> @@ -3813,21 +3813,19 @@ static int f2fs_sec_trim_file(struct file *filp, unsigned long arg) > >> file_start_write(filp); > >> inode_lock(inode); > >> > >> - if (f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode) || f2fs_compressed_file(inode)) { > >> + if (f2fs_is_atomic_file(inode) || f2fs_compressed_file(inode) || > >> + range.start >= inode->i_size) { > >> ret = -EINVAL; > >> goto err; > >> } > >> > >> - if (range.start >= inode->i_size) { > >> - ret = -EINVAL; > >> + if (range.len == 0) > >> goto err; > >> - } > >> > >> - if (inode->i_size - range.start < range.len) { > >> - ret = -E2BIG; > >> - goto err; > >> - } > >> - end_addr = range.start + range.len; > >> + if (range.len == (u64)-1 || inode->i_size - range.start < range.len) > >> + end_addr = inode->i_size; > > We can remove 'range.len == (u64)-1' condition since later condition can cover > this? > > > > > Hmm, what if there are blocks beyond i_size? Do we need to check i_blocks for > > The blocks beyond i_size will never be written, there won't be any valid message > there, so we don't need to worry about that. I don't think we have a way to guarantee the order of i_size and block allocation in f2fs. See f2fs_write_begin and f2fs_write_end. > > Thanks, > > > ending criteria? > > > >> + else > >> + end_addr = range.start + range.len; > >> > >> to_end = (end_addr == inode->i_size); > >> if (!IS_ALIGNED(range.start, F2FS_BLKSIZE) || > >> -- > >> 2.27.0.383.g050319c2ae-goog > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list > >> Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list > > Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel > > . > >