From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] fs: clear or set FMODE_LSEEK based on llseek function
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2022 15:11:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YrcXmwjPeJ77xsY2@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YrcQKIruM3w2gGho@infradead.org>
On Sat, Jun 25, 2022 at 06:39:52AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2022 at 02:29:09PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > I wouldn't bet on that - as it is, an ->open() instance can decide
> > in some cases to clear FMODE_LSEEK, despite having file_operations
> > with non-NULL ->llseek.
>
> The interesting cases here are nonseekable_open and stream_open,
> and I don't see why we could not fix this up in the file_operations.
What's the point, really? We can easily enforce "no FMODE_LSEEK ever
observed on files with NULL ->llseek" (this series does that), so we
can use that check alone in e.g. vfs_llseek() or dump_skip().
Sure, we are tight on bits in ->f_mode, but there's a better way to
relieve that problem - split the field into "stuff that needs to
be preserved all the way until __fput()" and the rest; the latter
could sit next to ->f_iocb_flags, with no increase of struct file
size.
So if you are worried about FMODE_... space getting exhausted, that's
better dealt with in a different way, IMO.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-25 14:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-25 11:01 [PATCH v2 0/8] cleanup llseek and splice Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-06-25 11:01 ` [PATCH v2 1/8] ksmbd: use vfs_llseek instead of dereferencing NULL Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-06-25 22:15 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-06-26 0:54 ` Steve French
2022-06-25 11:01 ` [PATCH v2 2/8] fs: do not set no_llseek in fops Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-06-25 11:01 ` [PATCH v2 3/8] fs: clear or set FMODE_LSEEK based on llseek function Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-06-25 13:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-06-25 13:29 ` Al Viro
2022-06-25 13:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-06-25 14:11 ` Al Viro [this message]
2022-06-25 11:01 ` [PATCH v2 4/8] fs: check FMODE_LSEEK to control internal pipe splicing Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-06-25 11:01 ` [PATCH v2 5/8] fs: do not compare against ->llseek Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-06-25 11:01 ` [PATCH v2 6/8] fs: remove no_llseek Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-06-25 13:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-06-25 21:53 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-06-25 11:01 ` [PATCH v2 7/8] dma-buf: remove useless FMODE_LSEEK flag Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-06-27 9:08 ` Daniel Vetter
2022-06-27 9:38 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-06-29 10:30 ` Sumit Semwal
2022-06-25 11:01 ` [PATCH v2 8/8] vfio: do not set " Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-06-27 20:07 ` Alex Williamson
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=YrcXmwjPeJ77xsY2@ZenIV \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@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