Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAOQ4uxj_DLm8_stRJPR7i8bp9aJ5VtjzWqHL2egCTKe3M-6KSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <al4pxc2uftonry5vyunx5qblllbaakjsehrc74fbbk7pxddyv7@gn3k55eldmmp>
In-Reply-To: <al4pxc2uftonry5vyunx5qblllbaakjsehrc74fbbk7pxddyv7@gn3k55eldmmp>
From:   Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Jun 2023 09:02:12 +0300
Message-ID: <CAOQ4uxjis1CbC+ZMXrr3ez4b=X4PRSWE6NVN=vFgukJOjuGPqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] splice: always fsnotify_access(in),
 fsnotify_modify(out) on success
To:     =?UTF-8?Q?Ahelenia_Ziemia=C5=84ska?= 
        <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz>
Cc:     Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        Chung-Chiang Cheng <cccheng@synology.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 2:09=E2=80=AFAM Ahelenia Ziemia=C5=84ska
<nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> wrote:
>
> The current behaviour caused an asymmetry where some write APIs
> (write, sendfile) would notify the written-to/read-from objects,
> but splice wouldn't.
>
> This affected userspace which used inotify, like coreutils tail -f.
>

typo: uses?

But this comment is not very clear IMO.
Please imagine that the reader is a distro maintainer or coreutils maintain=
er
How are they supposed to react to this comment?
Is this an important fix for them to backport??
How does this change actually affect tail -f?
Does it fix a bug in tail -f?
As far as I understand from our last conversation, the answer is
that it does not fix a bug in tail -f and it won't affect tail -f at all -
it would *allow* tail -f to be changed in a way that could improve
some use cases. Right? improve in what way exactly.

The simplest way to explain this fix perhaps would be to link to
a patch to tail and explain how the kernel+tail fixes improve a
use case.


> Fixes: 983652c69199 ("splice: report related fsnotify events")
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/jbyihkyk5dtaohdwjyivambb2gffy=
js3dodpofafnkkunxq7bu@jngkdxx65pux/t/#u
> Signed-off-by: Ahelenia Ziemia=C5=84ska <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xy=
z>
> Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
> ---
> No changes since v1 (except in the message).
>
>  fs/splice.c | 21 ++++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/splice.c b/fs/splice.c
> index 3e06611d19ae..94fae24f9d54 100644
> --- a/fs/splice.c
> +++ b/fs/splice.c
> @@ -1154,7 +1154,8 @@ long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t *off_in, str=
uct file *out,
>                 if ((in->f_flags | out->f_flags) & O_NONBLOCK)
>                         flags |=3D SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK;
>
> -               return splice_pipe_to_pipe(ipipe, opipe, len, flags);
> +               ret =3D splice_pipe_to_pipe(ipipe, opipe, len, flags);
> +               goto notify;
>         }
>
>         if (ipipe) {
> @@ -1182,15 +1183,12 @@ long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t *off_in, s=
truct file *out,
>                 ret =3D do_splice_from(ipipe, out, &offset, len, flags);
>                 file_end_write(out);
>
> -               if (ret > 0)
> -                       fsnotify_modify(out);
> -
>                 if (!off_out)
>                         out->f_pos =3D offset;
>                 else
>                         *off_out =3D offset;
>
> -               return ret;
> +               goto notify;
>         }
>
>         if (opipe) {
> @@ -1209,18 +1207,23 @@ long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t *off_in, s=
truct file *out,
>
>                 ret =3D splice_file_to_pipe(in, opipe, &offset, len, flag=
s);
>
> -               if (ret > 0)
> -                       fsnotify_access(in);
> -
>                 if (!off_in)
>                         in->f_pos =3D offset;
>                 else
>                         *off_in =3D offset;
>
> -               return ret;
> +               goto notify;
>         }
>
>         return -EINVAL;
> +
> +notify:
> +       if (ret > 0) {
> +               fsnotify_access(in);
> +               fsnotify_modify(out);
> +       }
> +
> +       return ret;
>  }
>

Sorry I haven't noticed this in the first review, but goto is not really ne=
eded.
We make the three cases if{}else if{}else if{}
and return -EINVAL in the else case.

It's not really that important, just a bit nicer IMO, so as you wish.

Thanks,
Amir.