linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with Linus' tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20211025132647.5e1c57b9@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Mon, 25 Oct 2021 13:26:47 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with Linus' tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in:

  fs/io_uring.c

between commits:

  4ea672ab694c ("io_uring: fix ltimeout unprep")
  b22fa62a35d7 ("io_uring: apply worker limits to previous users")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  d475a9a6226c ("io_uring: inline hot path of __io_queue_sqe()")
  c072481ded14 ("io_uring: mark cold functions")

from the block tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc fs/io_uring.c
index bc18af5e0a93,c2176bf339e0..000000000000
--- a/fs/io_uring.c
+++ b/fs/io_uring.c
@@@ -6947,7 -6906,33 +6903,33 @@@ static void io_queue_linked_timeout(str
  	io_put_req(req);
  }
  
- static void __io_queue_sqe(struct io_kiocb *req)
+ static void io_queue_sqe_arm_apoll(struct io_kiocb *req)
+ 	__must_hold(&req->ctx->uring_lock)
+ {
+ 	struct io_kiocb *linked_timeout = io_prep_linked_timeout(req);
+ 
+ 	switch (io_arm_poll_handler(req)) {
+ 	case IO_APOLL_READY:
+ 		if (linked_timeout) {
 -			io_unprep_linked_timeout(req);
++			io_queue_linked_timeout(linked_timeout);
+ 			linked_timeout = NULL;
+ 		}
+ 		io_req_task_queue(req);
+ 		break;
+ 	case IO_APOLL_ABORTED:
+ 		/*
+ 		 * Queued up for async execution, worker will release
+ 		 * submit reference when the iocb is actually submitted.
+ 		 */
+ 		io_queue_async_work(req, NULL);
+ 		break;
+ 	}
+ 
+ 	if (linked_timeout)
+ 		io_queue_linked_timeout(linked_timeout);
+ }
+ 
+ static inline void __io_queue_sqe(struct io_kiocb *req)
  	__must_hold(&req->ctx->uring_lock)
  {
  	struct io_kiocb *linked_timeout;
@@@ -10647,11 -10690,9 +10696,11 @@@ static __cold int io_unregister_iowq_af
  	return io_wq_cpu_affinity(tctx->io_wq, NULL);
  }
  
- static int io_register_iowq_max_workers(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
- 					void __user *arg)
+ static __cold int io_register_iowq_max_workers(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
+ 					       void __user *arg)
 +	__must_hold(&ctx->uring_lock)
  {
 +	struct io_tctx_node *node;
  	struct io_uring_task *tctx = NULL;
  	struct io_sq_data *sqd = NULL;
  	__u32 new_count[2];

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped