Received: by 2002:ac0:bc90:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id a16csp5178397img; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 03:46:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzhfi/+IjYNrwGugO6rWpOcmKLD/3X+5frjZzDe592X6nzvQxR7SW/XhgyIVpvg6p3GgazC X-Received: by 2002:a65:6283:: with SMTP id f3mr33967238pgv.125.1553683560942; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 03:46:00 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1553683560; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=QlSNW1IwQYSaiGqHqpOz7igGqDpGRxvQ08cB7tOv8UpMEZSyOs8pWlOdaKzYJqgKSr vdjuhaqdhmO7052L+WvoWA0sFMkyre/FgXVCnNMK2P3ncESPPCY652Wk6FOkAIHiGHJB y0eJIlkioj5FzzHLFBU1ecHmEZCn/MCzSgPhPGuYQlmbnj13FonMTYGdfyYqSfBDDQCS gg/CT+Txne6+c6GgpT4LboY7xuZiREgQ7sNEPhIfLwDpNDbsetLR9GYsUv/a3fM0gCaz /Q5m23axuLEnHY12g2JvJhDeOF/f/pDrBCgVOReuT4vEGjwu22kY+LLhIC83YKARi6aY wkIg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :date:message-id:cc:to:subject:from:dkim-signature:dkim-signature; bh=bLuekUlqFzmIMmKwsu2eKGF+DvRjbJugn49IAZaBu1U=; b=TkTbF963RBId/vb5vWn83anH8ahzMN/RA14/w1LupzLvnzmBPkJasIPq23aoKbgOSW fuOQCv1SqP7Iy+X04t6VSiCJr+vAzaZOy6wi9lvNGFgxePWlFSGLQTPeZ1WXyxjJOFZF xu1XAkCR6+lv1eCcUKtUvp06uNTjGv9wX0ptzgQr1rwxOktC3NloHJTli940QxV9xcqk CR1OzlOxtDC8btAOSlLAvdMHJ9ztJpCrVQwjVlIfb0qDsoAYL0iLTwlbeAU/SP5mKVnJ TPRfLHYHD+aBe4Ms3lKIB95dQOcncEyW8cwQ+vX86RVsyOo4239DIRKdP369YVQFNWkm teoQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@nexedi.com header.s=mandrill header.b=N1B7SbzO; dkim=pass header.i=@mandrillapp.com header.s=mandrill header.b=nG3tOzx2; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f22si18487323plr.57.2019.03.27.03.45.45; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 03:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@nexedi.com header.s=mandrill header.b=N1B7SbzO; dkim=pass header.i=@mandrillapp.com header.s=mandrill header.b=nG3tOzx2; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1733043AbfC0KoT (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 27 Mar 2019 06:44:19 -0400 Received: from mail177-9.suw61.mandrillapp.com ([198.2.177.9]:58519 "EHLO mail177-9.suw61.mandrillapp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729489AbfC0KoS (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Mar 2019 06:44:18 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 905 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 06:44:17 EDT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=mandrill; d=nexedi.com; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:Message-Id:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; i=kirr@nexedi.com; bh=bLuekUlqFzmIMmKwsu2eKGF+DvRjbJugn49IAZaBu1U=; b=N1B7SbzOdCwvhsmL47SWMdqZYwH4p9rfmypZbD3LDQprpAxOXZCs3M/V1RoNM/4VDK9J3XKH0F4i zi1bhHASBe8q475KEVerFYVVasgJfX1G5KWrUL1y+8H5AKr2f+aAh7yAlrz5aZ7SGU0lPnIZ9BTK Ss0MxtZwWkAqYZCEavs= Received: from pmta06.mandrill.prod.suw01.rsglab.com (127.0.0.1) by mail177-9.suw61.mandrillapp.com id hjda0222rtkl for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 10:15:14 +0000 (envelope-from ) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mandrillapp.com; i=@mandrillapp.com; q=dns/txt; s=mandrill; t=1553681714; h=From : Subject : To : Cc : Message-Id : Date : MIME-Version : Content-Type : Content-Transfer-Encoding : From : Subject : Date : X-Mandrill-User : List-Unsubscribe; bh=bLuekUlqFzmIMmKwsu2eKGF+DvRjbJugn49IAZaBu1U=; b=nG3tOzx2x3747oFpQnoQSOwSE2GvY1lk5zfJIhk2iNwlFqD4S5ybzgL1qEq1zmQtlbGOsZ TcLC9rzDYKxj3YZTccO5eAXlpS9JB5GHxTTSW+ZVl27CxY17kNLE1ldwSzDrdH0rVTsRRhi4 NU9ZavqXtq32FZiGr0O1sL5/DICw0= From: Kirill Smelkov Subject: [RESEND4, PATCH 0/2] fuse: don't stuck clients on retrieve_notify with size > max_write Received: from [87.98.221.171] by mandrillapp.com id 706099adce7248faa45fa9751e7be9eb; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 10:15:14 +0000 X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.21.0.392.gf8f6787159 To: Miklos Szeredi , Miklos Szeredi Cc: Han-Wen Nienhuys , Jakob Unterwurzacher , Kirill Tkhai , Andrew Morton , , , , Kirill Smelkov Message-Id: X-Report-Abuse: Please forward a copy of this message, including all headers, to abuse@mandrill.com X-Report-Abuse: You can also report abuse here: http://mandrillapp.com/contact/abuse?id=31050260.706099adce7248faa45fa9751e7be9eb X-Mandrill-User: md_31050260 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 10:15:14 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Miklos, On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 01:45:20PM +0300, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > Miklos, > > On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 02:47:57PM +0300, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 09:10:15AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 9:39 PM Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > > > > > > I more or less agree with this statement. However can we please make the > > > > breakage to be explicitly visible with an error instead of exhibiting it > > > > via harder to debug stucks/deadlocks? For example sys_read < max_write > > > > -> error instead of getting stuck. And if notify_retrieve requests > > > > buffer larger than max_write -> error or cut to max_write, but don't > > > > return OK when we know we will never send what was requested to > > > > filesystem even if it uses max_write sized reads. What is the point of > > > > breaking in hard to diagnose way when we can make the breakage showing > > > > itself explicitly? Would a patch for such behaviour accepted? > > > > > > Sure, if it's only adds a couple of lines. Adding more than say ten > > > lines for such a non-bug fix is definitely excessive. > > > > Ok, thanks. Please consider applying the following patch. (It's a bit > > pity to hear the problem is not considered to be a bug, but anyway). > > > > I will also send the second patch as another mail, since I could not > > made `git am --scissors` to apply several patched extracted from one > > mail successfully. > > [...] > > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 12:34:21PM +0300, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > Ping. Miklos, is there anything wrong with this patch and its > > second counterpart? > > As we were talking here are those patches. The first one cuts notify_retrieve > request to max_write and is one line only. The second one returns error to > filesystem server if it is buggy and does sys_read with buffer size < > max_write. It is 2 lines of code and 7 lines of comments. > > I still think that the patches fix real bugs. It is a bug if server behaviour > is a bit non-confirming or simply on an edge of being correct or questionable, > and instead of properly getting plain error from kernel, the whole system gets > stuck. It is a bug because bug amplification factor here is at least one order > of magnitude instead of staying ~1x. > > I'm sending the patches for the third time already, but did not get any > feedback. Could you please have a look? It's been ~ 1 month already since we agreed on the approach and initial postings of the patches that follow the agreed way: https://lwn.net/ml/linux-fsdevel/20190228114757.GA2796@deco.navytux.spb.ru/ Since then the patches were resent several times but without getting any feedback from you. Is there anything wrong with the patches? Could you please have a look? I understand everyone is busy but 1 month seems to be too much and I'm wondering whether maybe my mails got classified as spam or something else on your side. Thanks beforehand, Kirill Kirill Smelkov (2): fuse: retrieve: cap requested size to negotiated max_write fuse: require /dev/fuse reads to have enough buffer capacity as negotiated fs/fuse/dev.c | 12 +++++++++++- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) -- 2.21.0.392.gf8f6787159