public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
To: Lennert Buytenhek <[email protected]>,
	Jens Axboe <[email protected]>, Al Viro <[email protected]>,
	[email protected], [email protected],
	[email protected]
Cc: David Laight <[email protected]>,
	Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] io_uring: add support for IORING_OP_GETDENTS
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 12:10:02 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

On 19/02/2021 12:05, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 18/02/2021 12:27, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
>> IORING_OP_GETDENTS behaves much like getdents64(2) and takes the same
>> arguments, but with a small twist: it takes an additional offset
>> argument, and reading from the specified directory starts at the given
>> offset.
>>
>> For the first IORING_OP_GETDENTS call on a directory, the offset
>> parameter can be set to zero, and for subsequent calls, it can be
>> set to the ->d_off field of the last struct linux_dirent64 returned
>> by the previous IORING_OP_GETDENTS call.
>>
>> Internally, if necessary, IORING_OP_GETDENTS will vfs_llseek() to
>> the right directory position before calling vfs_getdents().
>>
>> IORING_OP_GETDENTS may or may not update the specified directory's
>> file offset, and the file offset should not be relied upon having
>> any particular value during or after an IORING_OP_GETDENTS call.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lennert Buytenhek <[email protected]>
>> ---
>>  fs/io_uring.c                 | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h |  1 +
>>  2 files changed, 74 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
>> index 056bd4c90ade..6853bf48369a 100644
>> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
>> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
>> @@ -635,6 +635,13 @@ struct io_mkdir {
>>  	struct filename			*filename;
>>  };
>>  
> [...]
>> +static int io_getdents(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
>> +{
>> +	struct io_getdents *getdents = &req->getdents;
>> +	bool pos_unlock = false;
>> +	int ret = 0;
>> +
>> +	/* getdents always requires a blocking context */
>> +	if (issue_flags & IO_URING_F_NONBLOCK)
>> +		return -EAGAIN;
>> +
>> +	/* for vfs_llseek and to serialize ->iterate_shared() on this file */
>> +	if (file_count(req->file) > 1) {
> 
> Looks racy, is it safe? E.g. can be concurrently dupped and used, or just
> several similar IORING_OP_GETDENTS requests.
> 
>> +		pos_unlock = true;
>> +		mutex_lock(&req->file->f_pos_lock);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (req->file->f_pos != getdents->pos) {
>> +		loff_t res = vfs_llseek(req->file, getdents->pos, SEEK_SET);
> 
> I may be missing the previous discussions, but can this ever become
> stateless, like passing an offset? Including readdir.c and beyond. 

I mean without those seeks. An emulation would look like rewinding
pos back after vfs_getdents, though might be awful on performance. 

> 
>> +		if (res < 0)
>> +			ret = res;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (ret == 0) {
>> +		ret = vfs_getdents(req->file, getdents->dirent,
>> +				   getdents->count);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (pos_unlock)
>> +		mutex_unlock(&req->file->f_pos_lock);
>> +
>> +	if (ret < 0) {
>> +		if (ret == -ERESTARTSYS)
>> +			ret = -EINTR;
>> +		req_set_fail_links(req);
>> +	}
>> +	io_req_complete(req, ret);
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
> [...]
> 

-- 
Pavel Begunkov

  reply	other threads:[~2021-02-19 12:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-02-18 12:26 [PATCH v3 0/2] io_uring: add support for IORING_OP_GETDENTS Lennert Buytenhek
2021-02-18 12:27 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] readdir: split the core of getdents64(2) out into vfs_getdents() Lennert Buytenhek
2021-02-18 12:27 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] io_uring: add support for IORING_OP_GETDENTS Lennert Buytenhek
2021-02-19 12:05   ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-02-19 12:10     ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2021-02-19 18:06     ` Lennert Buytenhek
2021-02-19 12:34   ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-02-19 18:07     ` Lennert Buytenhek
2021-02-19 18:59       ` Lennert Buytenhek
2021-02-20 17:44 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] " David Laight
2021-02-20 18:29   ` Jens Axboe
2021-02-21 19:38     ` David Laight
2021-02-21 21:12       ` Jens Axboe

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 \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    /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