On Fri, 25 Apr 2025 06:28:43 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Some file systems do not support read_iter or write_iter, such as selinuxfs
> > in this issue.
> > So before calling them, first confirm that the interface is supported and
> > then call it.
>
> Nit: commit messages should not have lines longer than 73 characters.
>
> Please also add a:
>
> Fixes: f2fed441c69b ("loop: stop using vfs_iter__{read,write} for buffered I/O")
OK, I would deal with both of the things you mentioned above.
>
> and maybe add a blurb that vfs_iter_read/write had this check.
It makes no sence. The current issue context does not involve vfs layer
iter_read/write related routines.
>
> Now the other interesting bit is why we did not hit this earlier with
> direct I/O? I guess it's because we basically have no instances
> supporting direct I/O and not using the iter ops.
>
> > @@ -603,6 +603,12 @@ static int loop_change_fd(struct loop_device *lo, struct block_device *bdev,
> > if (!file)
> > return -EBADF;
> >
> > + if (unlikely(!file->f_op->read_iter))
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + if (file->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE && unlikely(!file->f_op->write_iter))
> > + return -EINVAL;
>
> Can we have a common helper for change_fd and configure, please?
The common helper is not very meaningful for this case, but it may be
useful later, so it can be added.
>
> Please also drop the unlikelys - this is not a fast path and we don't
> need to micro-optimize.
Yes, you are right, I will drop it.
>
> A bit unrelated, but loop-configure actually checks for write_iter
> and forces read-only for that. Do we need the same kind of check in
> change_fd?
In the context of this case, it is necessary to judge the write mode of
the new file.
