Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7876FC282C0 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 16:42:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29F54218CD for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 16:42:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=umich.edu header.i=@umich.edu header.b="LFc9XrO2" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726778AbfAYQm3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jan 2019 11:42:29 -0500 Received: from mail-vk1-f196.google.com ([209.85.221.196]:35396 "EHLO mail-vk1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726265AbfAYQm3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jan 2019 11:42:29 -0500 Received: by mail-vk1-f196.google.com with SMTP id b18so2268183vke.2 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 08:42:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=umich.edu; s=google-2016-06-03; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=x3hiSTQZGO1pUMx+FV+cdbWbSAnjwEhtsNd6zNKuiFc=; b=LFc9XrO2FCFL8tqIfJW/74tW5Ic9M5ZqKVZ5m+AnGwaCWcysOsW5itHeQQES54qaYw 92QV71eqCHl567edJhNIrDO2NFJHNSKNU8e/5YQ5bchazsx2PFSh/ox5hcq32UrjNqGK UmrNTwfg1wGRXJKyvfOTj2wlJO2iKJK80l+dLtv95DrGY9vC2tc9SLL6LsiWQ9DXW2I0 c0Pou124AMzrfTqDWT+lUQ+ppYW0uIoRzEqp4MdwKnNJ4xK0k1udA+lf4PnrUYMgfHKs pIpBql3m1w3+GXOr135mgvjMdWSpjytWRu7o7vn+Vu7D+oRfod66aEvCRAcTwHaoG3Dr 7XWw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=x3hiSTQZGO1pUMx+FV+cdbWbSAnjwEhtsNd6zNKuiFc=; b=arDBPJCZA+9cCLtnro7oY3BNIwl92IUl5ed0nQ4YLdLyelFpt7o9sa0elkVr6/ukpu nCgqeiqZ8aBeEAggFAalX9kfE5hHEjhbYYI/scq6fq60z1D2ycLksFCtzj9BIR7SVBsb ekttMouvqLdohi8oZQgyhThEwBH35E1tywhra7lqu/dBTEWF+Mi2ql98UYglYgq1mwOS j8VuYTZQFumCXfBLB6odHlzaPZFPUnjtoUScOOl6nAUuqHybbW4uDzolsRlzqV1sK+iu LR0sMSiNzdmvigye+OZRFlGGOMsb/ocFjaIVPahCYaYL6A7FWz9myQwSlTVDiKNCgqEg 6A2Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukdm8n5WQzvWTcUwWC/svPNmQLbMpQRJ1hrTK93phT6zuxWMzyZf fSviGlZZ3w9NFfKJRlkXqpx8veeig0DgkQYMgP8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN4m6zilYgbLssddiK5iX770ZpJDQlRau+lqLq1nC9Pfq6onAutj7+DsWN3A1NYafSwXIE+roBPLAl9QWIgIrgg= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:a414:: with SMTP id n20mr4771212vke.83.1548434548283; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 08:42:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190121205838.18680-1-trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com> <20190125004658.GB3953@fieldses.org> <698446e18a6718ee1ced06ecfd06e2de802fa16e.camel@gmail.com> <20190125163218.GA2752@fieldses.org> In-Reply-To: <20190125163218.GA2752@fieldses.org> From: Olga Kornievskaia Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2019 11:42:17 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfsd: Fix error return values for nfsd4_clone_file_range() To: "J. Bruce Fields" Cc: Trond Myklebust , "J. Bruce Fields" , "Darrick J. Wong" , linux-nfs Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 11:32 AM J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 12:50:09AM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > On Thu, 2019-01-24 at 19:46 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 03:58:38PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > > > If the parameter 'count' is non-zero, nfsd4_clone_file_range() will > > > > currently clobber all errors returned by vfs_clone_file_range() and > > > > replace them with EINVAL. > > > > > > Oops, thanks for the fix. I'm still a little confused, though: > ... > > > > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/vfs.c b/fs/nfsd/vfs.c > > > > index 9824e32b2f23..7dc98e14655d 100644 > > > > --- a/fs/nfsd/vfs.c > > > > +++ b/fs/nfsd/vfs.c > > > > @@ -557,9 +557,11 @@ __be32 nfsd4_clone_file_range(struct file > > > > *src, u64 src_pos, struct file *dst, > > > > loff_t cloned; > > > > > > > > cloned = vfs_clone_file_range(src, src_pos, dst, dst_pos, > > > > count, 0); > > > > + if (cloned < 0) > > > > + return nfserrno(cloned); > > > > if (count && cloned != count) > > > > - cloned = -EINVAL; > > > > - return nfserrno(cloned < 0 ? cloned : 0); > > > > + return nfserrno(-EINVAL); > > > > + return 0; > > > > > > I still don't understand the cloned != count case. I thought clone > > > was > > > supposed to be all-or-nothing and atomic, can it really return a > > > short > > > copy? And how is that inval, shouldn't that be serverfault? > > > > That, quite frankly, seems like more of a question for Darrick, not me. > > I haven't changed that part of the code. > > > > The main thing I care about is being able to correctly report > > EOPNOTSUPP errors for the vast majority of filesystems that don't > > support clone() or dedup(). > > Makes sense, and I'm happy just to apply this and then sort out the rest in a > subsequent patch, but I'd really like to understand; Darrick?: > > ioctl_file_clone also converts short copies to EINVAL: > > if (cloned < 0) > ret = cloned; > else if (olen && cloned != olen) > ret = -EINVAL; > else > ret = 0; > > Maybe that happens iff we hit EOF in the short file? > > Does that mean we can successfully copy up to EOF and then return -EINVAL? > That sounds wrong. > > There's a man page (IOCTL-FICLONERANGE(2)) but it doesn't cover this case. I thought cloned by definition was all or nothing meaning there can't be a "short" clone. If you allow for less then asked bytes to be returned, then your next offsets might not be block aligned.