mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rajeev Mishra <rajeevm@hpe.com>
To: axboe@kernel.dk, yukuai1@huaweicloud.com
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dlemoal@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] loop: use vfs_getattr_nosec() for accurate file size
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 03:32:01 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250812033201.225425-1-rajeevm@hpe.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a8041180-03f2-3342-b568-867b3f295239@huaweicloud.com>

Hi Kuai,

Thank you for the feedback on the v2 patch regarding error handling.

Yu mentioned:
> return 0 here is odd. Why not "return ret;" to propagate the error if any ?

I understand the concern about proper error propagation. However, there's a 
type compatibility issue I'd like to discuss before implementing v3:

1. Current function signature: `static loff_t get_size(...)` 
   - Returns size as positive loff_t (unsigned 64-bit)  
   - All callers expect non-negative size values

2. vfs_getattr_nosec() error codes are negative integers (-ENOENT, -EIO, etc.)
   - Returning `ret` would cast negative errors to huge positive numbers
   - This could cause loop devices to appear as exabyte-sized

3. Current callers like loop_set_size() don't handle error checking

Would you prefer for v3:
a) Change function signature to `int get_size(..., loff_t *size)` and update all callers  
b) Different approach?

diff with ret approach

diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
index c418c47db76e..15117630c6c1 100644
--- a/drivers/block/loop.c
+++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
@@ -142,12 +142,13 @@ static int part_shift;
  * @offset: offset into the backing file
  * @sizelimit: user-specified size limit
  * @file: the backing file
+ * @size: pointer to store the calculated size
  *
  * Calculate the effective size of the loop device
  *
- * Returns: size in 512-byte sectors, or 0 if invalid
+ * Returns: 0 on success, negative error code on failure
  */
-static loff_t get_size(loff_t offset, loff_t sizelimit, struct file *file)
+static int get_size(loff_t offset, loff_t sizelimit, struct file *file, loff_t *size)
 {
        struct kstat stat;
        loff_t loopsize;
@@ -159,7 +160,7 @@ static loff_t get_size(loff_t offset, loff_t sizelimit, struct file *file)
         */
        ret = vfs_getattr_nosec(&file->f_path, &stat, STATX_SIZE, 0);
        if (ret)
-               return 0;
+               return ret;

        loopsize = stat.size;

@@ -167,7 +168,7 @@ static loff_t get_size(loff_t offset, loff_t sizelimit, struct file *file)
                loopsize -= offset;
        /* offset is beyond i_size, weird but possible */
        if (loopsize < 0)
-               return 0;
+               return -EINVAL;

        if (sizelimit > 0 && sizelimit < loopsize)
                loopsize = sizelimit;
@@ -175,12 +176,20 @@ static loff_t get_size(loff_t offset, loff_t sizelimit, struct file *file)
         * Unfortunately, if we want to do I/O on the device,
         * the number of 512-byte sectors has to fit into a sector_t.
         */
-       return loopsize >> 9;
+       *size = loopsize >> 9;
+       return 0;
 }

 static loff_t get_loop_size(struct loop_device *lo, struct file *file)
 {
-       return get_size(lo->lo_offset, lo->lo_sizelimit, file);
+       loff_t size;
+       int ret;
+
+       ret = get_size(lo->lo_offset, lo->lo_sizelimit, file, &size);
+       if (ret)
+               return 0;  /* Fallback to 0 on error for backward compatibility */
+
+       return size;
 }


I am happy to implement whichever direction you think is best.

Thanks,
Rajeev

  reply	other threads:[~2025-08-12  3:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-08-11 19:03 Rajeev Mishra
2025-08-12  1:40 ` Damien Le Moal
2025-08-12  2:05   ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-12  3:32     ` Rajeev Mishra [this message]
2025-08-12  3:42       ` Damien Le Moal
2025-08-12  4:28         ` Al Viro
2025-08-12  5:17           ` Damien Le Moal
2025-08-12  8:37             ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-12  9:34               ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-12  8:39         ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-12  4:25       ` Al Viro
2025-08-12  8:39 ` Christoph Hellwig

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20250812033201.225425-1-rajeevm@hpe.com \
    --to=rajeevm@hpe.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yukuai1@huaweicloud.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®