Re: [PATCH v4 01/21] iomap: split iomap_iter() logic into iomap_iter_next()
"Darrick J. Wong" <[email protected]> Tue, 28 Jul 2026 08:55:08 -0700
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-ext4,org.kernel.vger.linux-fsdevel,org.kernel.vger.linux-xfs |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <20260728155508.GT2901224@frogsfrogsfrogs> |
On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 09:49:40AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 02:17:38PM -0700, Joanne Koong wrote: > > In preparation for changing iomap to use an in-iter (->iomap_next()) > > model, move the iomap_iter() logic out into the new iomap_iter_next() > > helper function. > > > > iomap_iter_next() is added as an inlined helper so it can be called > > directly by ->iomap_next() implementations where the begin()/end() > > callbacks can be direct calls. > > > > The DEFINE_IOMAP_ITER_NEXT() and DEFINE_IOMAP_ITER_NEXT_END() macros are > > also provided to generate the boilerplate ->iomap_next() wrapper > > functions that simply forward to iomap_iter_next() with the appropriate > > begin/end callbacks. DEFINE_IOMAP_ITER_NEXT() is for the common case > > where there is no end() callback. DEFINE_IOMAP_ITER_NEXT_END() is for > > the case where there is an explicit end() callback. > > > > No functional change intended. The only code-level difference is that on > > the iomap_end() error path (ret < 0 && !advanced), the old code returned > > with iter.status left as the caller's last value whereas the new code > > zeroes it, but this is not observable in practice as there are no in-tree > > callers that read iter.status after the iteration loop. > > > > Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <[email protected]> > > Reviewed-by: Fengnan Chang <[email protected]> > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Joanne Koong <[email protected]> > > --- > > fs/iomap/iter.c | 123 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------------- > > include/linux/iomap.h | 102 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ > > 2 files changed, 147 insertions(+), 78 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/iomap/iter.c b/fs/iomap/iter.c > > index e4a29829591a..66ccb87441ab 100644 > > --- a/fs/iomap/iter.c > > +++ b/fs/iomap/iter.c > > @@ -6,15 +6,6 @@ > > #include <linux/iomap.h> > > #include "trace.h" > > > > -static inline void iomap_iter_clean_fbatch(struct iomap_iter *iter) > > -{ > > - if (iter->iomap.flags & IOMAP_F_FOLIO_BATCH) { > > - folio_batch_release(iter->fbatch); > > - folio_batch_reinit(iter->fbatch); > > - iter->iomap.flags &= ~IOMAP_F_FOLIO_BATCH; > > - } > > -} > > - > > So hch forwarded me a bit of Sashiko review feedback that called out a > potential folio batch leak on error returns from iomap_begin() or > iomap_end(). Note that I think the ->iomap_end() variant is currently > not an issue because nothing returns error there, but it should be fixed > regardless. > > As such, I have the patch below as a fix based on current master. The > idea here is to account for failures from either callback and also the > fact that XFS may not necessarily transfer the iomap_flags on failure. I > considered a couple other options here, like changing that behavior or > using an iter flag, but I think this is the cleanest option. > > However this obviously conflicts with this rework series. This isn't a > major conflict IMO.. I'd probably just do the same thing and include the > batch cleanup in the error/exit path of iomap_iter() (or maybe start > passing ret into iomap_iter_done()), but I would need to reintroduce the > helper above. Also after this series I think this could mean a duplicate > call in the termination case where iomap_iter_continue() would have > cleaned things up, but that is relatively harmless. Maybe there is > something incrementally cleaner, but I'm still wrapping my head around > the factoring here.. > > But anyways, the main thing I wanted to ask is how folks want to handle > this particular bug..? This rework is invasive and looks mostly reviewed > so I don't want to unnecessarily hold it up. I can rebase on top of this > and leave the patch below for -stable, or avoid the helper churn and > post the patch below on its own and rework it into this, or maybe just > tweak this to leave the helper around and avoid some churn that way.. > thoughts? From my 30000ft view I'd say push the folio leak fix to linus ASAP for 7.2 and work out the merge conflict resolution in for-next and send that to broonie/linus for 7.3. But I'm not sure if people are actually hitting this and not realizing it; or if this is a fix for a theoretical problem. --D > Brian > > --- 8< --- > > diff --git a/fs/iomap/iter.c b/fs/iomap/iter.c > index e4a29829591a..63617ec48250 100644 > --- a/fs/iomap/iter.c > +++ b/fs/iomap/iter.c > @@ -6,12 +6,18 @@ > #include <linux/iomap.h> > #include "trace.h" > > +/* > + * Release the iter folio batch. Note that the iomap flag is meant to control > + * the I/O path for the mapping and may not be set in error situations. > + */ > static inline void iomap_iter_clean_fbatch(struct iomap_iter *iter) > { > - if (iter->iomap.flags & IOMAP_F_FOLIO_BATCH) { > + if (!iter->fbatch) > + return; > + iter->iomap.flags &= ~IOMAP_F_FOLIO_BATCH; > + if (folio_batch_count(iter->fbatch)) { > folio_batch_release(iter->fbatch); > folio_batch_reinit(iter->fbatch); > - iter->iomap.flags &= ~IOMAP_F_FOLIO_BATCH; > } > } > > @@ -79,7 +85,7 @@ int iomap_iter(struct iomap_iter *iter, const struct iomap_ops *ops) > olen), > advanced, iter->flags, &iter->iomap); > if (ret < 0 && !advanced) > - return ret; > + goto error; > } > > /* detect old return semantics where this would advance */ > @@ -110,7 +116,11 @@ int iomap_iter(struct iomap_iter *iter, const struct iomap_ops *ops) > ret = ops->iomap_begin(iter->inode, iter->pos, iter->len, iter->flags, > &iter->iomap, &iter->srcmap); > if (ret < 0) > - return ret; > + goto error; > iomap_iter_done(iter); > return 1; > + > +error: > + iomap_iter_clean_fbatch(iter); > + return ret; > } > >