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 43C47C432BE for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 19:18:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C72A60FE6 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 19:18:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231490AbhH0TTg (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Aug 2021 15:19:36 -0400 Received: from zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk ([142.44.231.140]:42758 "EHLO zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231262AbhH0TTT (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Aug 2021 15:19:19 -0400 Received: from viro by zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mJhKn-00GZbg-UX; Fri, 27 Aug 2021 19:16:13 +0000 Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2021 19:16:13 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andreas Gruenbacher , Christoph Hellwig , "Darrick J. Wong" , Jan Kara , Matthew Wilcox , cluster-devel , linux-fsdevel , Linux Kernel Mailing List , ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 04/19] iov_iter: Turn iov_iter_fault_in_readable into fault_in_iov_iter_readable Message-ID: References: <20210827164926.1726765-1-agruenba@redhat.com> <20210827164926.1726765-5-agruenba@redhat.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 Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 11:57:19AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 11:53 AM Al Viro wrote: > > > > I really disagree with these calling conventions. "Number not faulted in" > > is bloody useless > > It's what we already have for copy_to/from_user(), so it's actually > consistent with that. After copy_to/copy_from you've got the data copied and it's not going anywhere. After fault-in you still have to copy, and it still can give you less data than fault-in had succeeded for. So you must handle short copies separately, no matter how much you've got from fault-in. > And it avoids changing all the existing tests where people really > cared only about the "everything ok" case. The thing is, the checks tend to be wrong. We can't rely upon the full fault-in to expect the full copy-in/copy-out, so the checks downstream are impossible to avoid anyway. And fault-in failure is always a slow path, so we are not saving time here. And for the memory poisoining we end up aborting a copy potentially a lot earlier than we should. > Andreas' first patch did that changed version, and was ugly as hell. > > But if you have a version that avoids the ugliness... I'll need to dig my notes out...