On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 07:33:18PM +0000, Taylor R Campbell wrote: > Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 20:04:17 +0100 > From: Manuel Bouyer <[email protected]> > > On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 06:54:35PM +0000, Taylor R Campbell wrote: > > However, I think there's a bug in your new patch too: suppose VOP_BMAP > > fails on one of the middle blocks -- then we won't call VOP_STRATEGY > > for the last block even if VOP_BMAP succeeds for that block. > > AFAIK that can't happen: if VOP_BMAP fails for a middle block, error > will be != 0 and we exit the loop: > > OK, I didn't look that closely. In that case, your patch looks good > to me, although I'd put a KASSERT(0 < b->b_resid) before the loop just > to be safe. > > We should probably do the same thing in genfs_do_io and anywhere else > that uses nestiobuf for writes, and invent a better way to express the > nestiobuf API so it's less ridiculously error-prone.
Yes, I'll look at this (but I don't know why it does +2 here). But I guess genfs_do_io() is safe as is: it's probably called with the vnode locked, as VOP_BMAP() is called without taking and releasing the lock. -- Manuel Bouyer <[email protected]> NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference --
