[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201227212531.GD3579531@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 21:25:31 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jussi Kivilinna <jussi.kivilinna@....fi>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>, lwn@....net,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: LXC broken with 5.10-stable?, ok with 5.9-stable (Re: Linux
5.10.3)
On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 12:12:00PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 11:05 AM Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 10:39 AM Jussi Kivilinna <jussi.kivilinna@....fi> wrote:
> > >
> > > 5.10.3 with patch compiles fine, but does not solve the issue.
> >
> > Duh. adding the read_iter only fixes kernel_read(). For splice, it also needs a
> >
> > .splice_read = generic_file_splice_read,
> >
> > in the file operations, something like this...
>
> Ok, I verified that patch with the test-case in the bugzilla, and it
> seems trivially fine.
>
> So it's committed as 14e3e989f6a5 ("proc mountinfo: make splice
> available again") now.
Is there any point in not doing the same (scripted, obviously) for
all instances with .read == seq_read? IIRC, Christoph even posted
something along those lines, but it went nowhere for some reason...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists