From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (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 EFAF35576C for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 09:20:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706520018; cv=none; b=G2SzGaC8aRgKiz9U8KQNPmwzgRu6nAS2WVT0m3nX8OMPL6EVYJyldSLH2Chcl49fZaLgI6vsOEz8PEsVP3h2SNLfJbgry5ikTbnfK3blP1lHXOqj4n6CgWfOFMGbexn07gcwkmZkxln5v/t9TRYHH+k+yMmTcGMLu/NBYdhfzJA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706520018; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LbT0h7I/khtawXpM4JWajyKGu9MxvthOZ4Avo9E26OY=; h=From:In-Reply-To:References:To:Cc:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Content-Type; b=LUAlgfSrve0f1w10e8LyC46hoZu1/zkoWycLKjgjs1iLDhE0k8gu0I465DIALCHMjy4PR3tm8LXtNyVpuZg6Mr84F5KpdHWlf5LG9oOv/jiCG1lbm/xJGc2cmEQKRsHRC71ko4YqhDXooOggmIGALQbtca3B8U+Pbdur6VXBN90= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=I45ST0PX; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="I45ST0PX" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1706520015; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=q1qnJyU+OqBjXnjA274wGrx2fIgyJAmc6VYOr1sVyHY=; b=I45ST0PXd8iBTq7vKy5PGHk52NJoB/ASOP2eRvknM+cs5VCwIWkUjAWTwaVZiq9s1ClQzN L1JnPcK7aYEGq5TUH9yKHVwiAsQlhJJHpJAg7dMNdUvWW8wUn3L87OG4bMdQdnT2Sl62M5 OLa4Xu/syLd73KhBvUkcd3HawnrWKuE= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-645-759oXP6NPnuxhK4i0dlKlA-1; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 04:20:10 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 759oXP6NPnuxhK4i0dlKlA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.7]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9BCE868907; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 09:20:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from warthog.procyon.org.uk (unknown [10.42.28.245]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A7741C060B2; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 09:20:08 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: References: To: Dominique Martinet Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Eric Van Hensbergen , v9fs@lists.linux.dev, linux_oss@crudebyte.com Subject: Re: fs/9p: regression in 6.8-rc1 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: v9fs@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 09:20:08 +0000 Message-ID: <1217440.1706520008@warthog.procyon.org.uk> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.7 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dominique Martinet wrote: > I was going to say we probably need to filter it out - but it looks like > that might be netfs' job given the call trace I get: >=20 > # retsnoop -T -e vfs_write -a :fs/9p/*.c -a :fs/netfs/*.c > FUNCTION CALL TRACE RESULT DURATION > --------------------------------- -------------------- ---------- > =E2=86=92 vfs_write = =20 > =E2=86=92 netfs_unbuffered_write_iter = =20 Yeah - I should check to see if generic_write_checks() returned 0 and skip = if it did (as does netfs_file_write_iter()). It might also be worth doing the check before even taking any locks. David