linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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).