Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [git pull] iov_iter fixes
To:     Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <YTrJsrXPbu1jXKDZ@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
 <b8786a7e-5616-ce83-c2f2-53a4754bf5a4@kernel.dk>
 <YTrM130S32ymVhXT@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
 <9ae5f07f-f4c5-69eb-bcb1-8bcbc15cbd09@kernel.dk>
 <YTrQuvqvJHd9IObe@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
 <f02eae7c-f636-c057-4140-2e688393f79d@kernel.dk>
 <YTrSqvkaWWn61Mzi@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
 <9855f69b-e67e-f7d9-88b8-8941666ab02f@kernel.dk>
 <YTtu1V1c1emiYII9@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
 <75caf6d6-26d4-7146-c497-ed89b713d878@kernel.dk>
 <YTt6l9gDX+kXwtBW@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Message-ID: <565e8aa7-27e7-4c3c-1a84-4181194c74d8@kernel.dk>
Date:   Fri, 10 Sep 2021 09:36:06 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <YTt6l9gDX+kXwtBW@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 9/10/21 9:32 AM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 09:08:02AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> 
>>> You actually can cut it down even more - nr_segs + iov remains constant
>>> all along, so you could get away with just 3 words here...  I would be
>>
>> Mmm, the iov pointer remains constant? Maybe I'm missing your point, but
>> the various advance functions are quite happy to increment iter->iov or
>> iter->bvec, so we need to restore them. From a quick look, looks like
>> iter->nr_segs is modified for advancing too.
>>
>> What am I missing?
> 
> i->iov + i->nr_segs does not change - the places incrementing the former
> will decrement the latter by the same amount.  So it's enough to store
> either of those - the other one can be recovered by subtracting the
> saved value from the current i->iov + i->nr_segs.

Ahh, clever. Yes that should work just fine. Let me test that and send
out a proposal. Thanks Al.

-- 
Jens Axboe