From: Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@codewreck.org>
To: Christian Theune <ct@flyingcircus.io>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Ryan Lahfa <ryan@lahfa.xyz>,
Antony Antony <antony.antony@secunet.com>,
Antony Antony <antony@phenome.org>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@kernel.org>,
Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@ionkov.net>,
Christian Schoenebeck <linux_oss@crudebyte.com>,
Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>,
Maximilian Bosch <maximilian@mbosch.me>,
regressions@lists.linux.dev, v9fs@lists.linux.dev,
netfs@lists.linux.dev, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] 9pfs issues on 6.12-rc1
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 15:44:14 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aF49vp50BkfjJOTG@codewreck.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <C7DAFD20-65D2-4B61-A612-A25FCC0C9573@flyingcircus.io>
Hi all,
sorry for the slow reply; I wasn't in Cc of most of the mails back in
October so this is a pain to navigate... Let me recap a bit:
- stuff started failing in 6.12-rc1
- David first posted "9p: Don't revert the I/O iterator after
reading"[1], which fixed the bug, but then found a "better" fix as
"iov_iter: Fix iov_iter_get_pages*() for folio_queue" [2] which was
merged instead (so the first patch was not merged)
But it turns out the second patch is not enough (or causes another
issue?), and the reverting it + applying first one works, is that
correct?
What happens if you keep [2] and just apply [1], does that still bug?
(I've tried reading through the thread now and I don't even see what was
the "bad" patch in the first place, although I assume it's ee4cdf7ba857
("netfs: Speed up buffered reading") -- was that confirmed?)
David, as you worked on this at the time it'd be great if you could have
another look, I have no idea what made you try [1] in the first place
but unless you think 9p is doing something wrong like double-reverting
on error or something like that I'd like to understand a bit more what
happens... Although given 6.12 is getting used more now it could make
sense to just apply [1] first until we understand, and have a proper fix
come second -- if someone can confirm we don't need to revert [2].
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/3327438.1729678025@warthog.procyon.org.uk/T/#mc97a248b0f673dff6dc8613b508ca4fd45c4fefe
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/3327438.1729678025@warthog.procyon.org.uk/T/#m89597a1144806db4ae89992953031cdffa0b0bf9
Thanks,
--
Dominique
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-27 6:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <D4LHHUNLG79Y.12PI0X6BEHRHW@mbosch.me>
2024-10-02 17:31 ` [REGRESSION] 9pfs issues on 6.12-rc1 Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)
2024-10-02 21:48 ` Maximilian Bosch
2024-10-03 1:12 ` Sedat Dilek
2024-10-17 18:00 ` Antony Antony
2024-10-21 13:23 ` Christian Brauner
2024-10-23 18:35 ` Maximilian Bosch
2024-10-21 14:12 ` David Howells
2024-10-21 15:33 ` Antony Antony
2024-10-21 14:45 ` David Howells
2024-10-21 15:53 ` Antony Antony
2024-10-21 19:48 ` David Howells
2025-08-10 5:10 ` Arnout Engelen
2024-10-21 20:38 ` [PATCH] 9p: Don't revert the I/O iterator after reading David Howells
2024-10-21 23:53 ` Antony Antony
2024-10-22 8:56 ` Christian Brauner
2024-10-23 10:07 ` [REGRESSION] 9pfs issues on 6.12-rc1 David Howells
2024-10-23 19:38 ` Antony Antony
2025-06-12 22:24 ` Ryan Lahfa
2025-06-27 5:44 ` Christian Theune
2025-06-27 6:44 ` Dominique Martinet [this message]
2025-06-27 8:19 ` Christian Theune
2025-08-10 17:57 ` Arnout Engelen
2025-08-11 0:57 ` asmadeus
2025-08-11 7:43 ` Dominique Martinet
2025-08-11 12:43 ` Arnout Engelen
2025-06-27 10:00 ` David Howells
2025-06-27 10:33 ` Ryan Lahfa
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=aF49vp50BkfjJOTG@codewreck.org \
--to=asmadeus@codewreck.org \
--cc=antony.antony@secunet.com \
--cc=antony@phenome.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=ct@flyingcircus.io \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=ericvh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux_oss@crudebyte.com \
--cc=lucho@ionkov.net \
--cc=maximilian@mbosch.me \
--cc=netfs@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ryan@lahfa.xyz \
--cc=sedat.dilek@gmail.com \
--cc=v9fs@lists.linux.dev \
/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).