From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 0B022C433E6 for ; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 19:41:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D051B64E43 for ; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 19:41:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229871AbhBTTlk (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Feb 2021 14:41:40 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49128 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229828AbhBTTlf (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Feb 2021 14:41:35 -0500 Received: from zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk (zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk [IPv6:2607:5300:60:148a::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF183C061574 for ; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 11:40:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from viro by zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lDY7V-00GPdn-Ie; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 19:40:49 +0000 Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 19:40:49 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Linus Torvalds Cc: syzbot , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jiri Slaby , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, snovitoll@gmail.com, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: WARNING in iov_iter_revert (2) Message-ID: References: <0000000000001fb73f05bb767334@google.com> <0000000000000ca18b05bbc556d6@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: Al Viro Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 07:29:57PM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > And then you notice that it has reports > successful write of amount other than what you'd passed and tries > to pull back. Sorry, half-edited sentence has escaped ;-/ Should be "And there the caller notices that callback has reported a successful write, but the amount apparently written is not the same as the amount it had asked to write. It interprets that as a short write and tries to pull back. Only it's actually _forward_, since we'd asked to write 0 bytes and got a small positive number from the callback."