On 8/4/25 16:08, Keith Busch wrote:
On Mon, Aug 04, 2025 at 08:54:00AM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 8/2/25 01:47, Keith Busch wrote:
+static int bio_align_to_lbs(struct bio *bio, struct iov_iter *iter)
+{
+ struct block_device *bdev = bio->bi_bdev;
+ size_t nbytes;
+
+ if (!bdev)
+ return 0;
+
+ nbytes = bio->bi_iter.bi_size & (bdev_logical_block_size(bdev) - 1);
+ if (!nbytes)
+ return 0;
+
+ bio_revert(bio, nbytes);
+ iov_iter_revert(iter, nbytes);
+ if (!bio->bi_iter.bi_size)
+ return -EFAULT;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
/**
* bio_iov_iter_get_pages - add user or kernel pages to a bio
* @bio: bio to add pages to
@@ -1336,6 +1355,7 @@ int bio_iov_iter_get_pages(struct bio *bio, struct iov_iter *iter)
ret = __bio_iov_iter_get_pages(bio, iter);
} while (!ret && iov_iter_count(iter) && !bio_full(bio, 0));
+ ret = bio_align_to_lbs(bio, iter);
return bio->bi_vcnt ? 0 : ret;
Wouldn't that cause the error from bio_align_to_lba() to be ignored
if bio->bi_vcnt is greater than 0?
That returns an error only if the alignment reduces the size to 0, so
there would be a bug somewhere if bi_vcnt is not also 0 in that case.
It would, but we wouldn't be seeing it as 'ret' would be obscured
if 'bio->bi_vcnt' continues to be greater than zero and 'ret' is set.
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Kernel Storage Architect
hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Frankenstr. 146, 90461 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), GF: I. Totev, A. McDonald, W. Knoblich
