From nobody Fri Oct 24 08:12:49 2025 X-Original-To: dev-commits-src-main@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ctFyQ3p23z6DmrN; Fri, 24 Oct 2025 08:13:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from kib.kiev.ua (kib.kiev.ua [IPv6:2001:470:d5e7:1::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4ctFyQ0FNGz3NNp; Fri, 24 Oct 2025 08:13:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from tom.home (kib@localhost [127.0.0.1] (may be forged)) by kib.kiev.ua (8.18.1/8.18.1) with ESMTP id 59O8CnKE056090; Fri, 24 Oct 2025 11:12:52 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 kib.kiev.ua 59O8CnKE056090 Received: (from kostik@localhost) by tom.home (8.18.1/8.18.1/Submit) id 59O8Cndt056089; Fri, 24 Oct 2025 11:12:49 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) X-Authentication-Warning: tom.home: kostik set sender to kostikbel@gmail.com using -f Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2025 11:12:49 +0300 From: Konstantin Belousov To: Alan Somers Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org, dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org Subject: Re: git: 6d408ac49073 - main - fusefs: add a regression test for a cluster_read bug Message-ID: References: <202510231341.59NDf5as007410@gitrepo.freebsd.org> List-Id: Commit messages for the main branch of the src repository List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/dev-commits-src-main List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-BeenThere: dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org Sender: owner-dev-commits-src-main@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <202510231341.59NDf5as007410@gitrepo.freebsd.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,FREEMAIL_FROM, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1 (2024-03-26) on tom.home X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:6939, ipnet:2001:470::/32, country:US] X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4ctFyQ0FNGz3NNp On Thu, Oct 23, 2025 at 01:41:05PM +0000, Alan Somers wrote: > The branch main has been updated by asomers: > > URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=6d408ac490730614b3ed0ebd3caffcd23f303fb4 > > commit 6d408ac490730614b3ed0ebd3caffcd23f303fb4 > Author: Alan Somers > AuthorDate: 2025-10-23 13:40:56 +0000 > Commit: Alan Somers > CommitDate: 2025-10-23 13:40:56 +0000 > > fusefs: add a regression test for a cluster_read bug > > VOP_BMAP is purely advisory. If VOP_BMAP returns an error during > readahead, cluster_read should still succeed, because the actual data > was still read just fine. No, VOP_BMAP() is not advisory. But read-ahead beyond the first buffer is. The BMAP in question is to translate lblk for read-ahead buffer. > > Add a regression test for PR 264196, wherein cluster_read would fail if > VOP_BMAP did. > > PR: 264196 > MFC with: 62aef3f73f38db9fb68bffc12cc8900fecd58f0e > Reported by: danfe > Reviewed by: arrowd > Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D51316 > --- > tests/sys/fs/fusefs/bmap.cc | 87 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 87 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tests/sys/fs/fusefs/bmap.cc b/tests/sys/fs/fusefs/bmap.cc > index 30612079657d..e61dadb6d79e 100644 > --- a/tests/sys/fs/fusefs/bmap.cc > +++ b/tests/sys/fs/fusefs/bmap.cc > @@ -177,6 +177,93 @@ TEST_F(Bmap, default_) > leak(fd); > } > > +/* > + * The server returns an error for some reason for FUSE_BMAP. fusefs should > + * faithfully report that error up to the caller. > + */ > +TEST_F(Bmap, einval) > +{ > + struct fiobmap2_arg arg; > + const off_t filesize = 1 << 30; > + int64_t lbn = 100; > + const ino_t ino = 42; > + int fd; > + > + expect_lookup(RELPATH, 42, filesize); > + expect_open(ino, 0, 1); > + EXPECT_CALL(*m_mock, process( > + ResultOf([=](auto in) { > + return (in.header.opcode == FUSE_BMAP && > + in.header.nodeid == ino); > + }, Eq(true)), > + _) > + ).WillOnce(Invoke(ReturnErrno(EINVAL))); > + > + fd = open(FULLPATH, O_RDWR); > + ASSERT_LE(0, fd) << strerror(errno); > + > + arg.bn = lbn; > + arg.runp = -1; > + arg.runb = -1; > + ASSERT_EQ(-1, ioctl(fd, FIOBMAP2, &arg)); > + EXPECT_EQ(EINVAL, errno); > + > + leak(fd); > +} > + > +/* > + * Even if the server returns EINVAL during VOP_BMAP, we should still be able > + * to successfully read a block. This is a regression test for > + * https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=264196 . The bug did not > + * lie in fusefs, but this is a convenient place for a regression test. > + */ > +TEST_F(Bmap, spurious_einval) > +{ > + const off_t filesize = 4ull << 30; > + const ino_t ino = 42; > + int fd, r; > + char buf[1]; > + > + expect_lookup(RELPATH, 42, filesize); > + expect_open(ino, 0, 1); > + EXPECT_CALL(*m_mock, process( > + ResultOf([=](auto in) { > + return (in.header.opcode == FUSE_BMAP && > + in.header.nodeid == ino); > + }, Eq(true)), > + _) > + ).WillRepeatedly(Invoke(ReturnErrno(EINVAL))); > + EXPECT_CALL(*m_mock, process( > + ResultOf([=](auto in) { > + return (in.header.opcode == FUSE_READ && > + in.header.nodeid == ino && > + in.body.read.offset == 0 && > + in.body.read.size == (uint64_t)m_maxbcachebuf); > + }, Eq(true)), > + _) > + ).WillOnce(Invoke(ReturnImmediate([=](auto in, auto& out) { > + size_t osize = in.body.read.size; > + > + assert(osize < sizeof(out.body.bytes)); > + out.header.len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header) + osize; > + bzero(out.body.bytes, osize); > + }))); > + > + fd = open(FULLPATH, O_RDWR); > + ASSERT_LE(0, fd) << strerror(errno); > + > + /* > + * Read the same block multiple times. On a system affected by PR > + * 264196 , the second read will fail. > + */ > + r = read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf)); > + EXPECT_EQ(r, 1) << strerror(errno); > + r = read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf)); > + EXPECT_EQ(r, 1) << strerror(errno); > + r = read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf)); > + EXPECT_EQ(r, 1) << strerror(errno); > +} > + > /* > * VOP_BMAP should not query the server for the file's size, even if its cached > * attributes have expired.