linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the scsi tree with the block 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: <20220307151453.21e0ceab@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Mon, 7 Mar 2022 15:14:52 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the scsi tree with the block tree

Hi all,

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

  block/blk-merge.c

between commit:

  6928b8f7eafa ("block: remove the per-bio/request write hint")

from the block tree and commit:

  73bd66d9c834 ("scsi: block: Remove REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME support")

from the scsi 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 block/blk-merge.c
index 0e871d4e7cb8,87cee7e82ae1..000000000000
--- a/block/blk-merge.c
+++ b/block/blk-merge.c
@@@ -778,10 -749,13 +747,6 @@@ static struct request *attempt_merge(st
  	if (rq_data_dir(req) != rq_data_dir(next))
  		return NULL;
  
- 	if (req_op(req) == REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME &&
- 	    !blk_write_same_mergeable(req->bio, next->bio))
 -	/*
 -	 * Don't allow merge of different write hints, or for a hint with
 -	 * non-hint IO.
 -	 */
 -	if (req->write_hint != next->write_hint)
--		return NULL;
--
  	if (req->ioprio != next->ioprio)
  		return NULL;
  
@@@ -903,11 -877,13 +868,6 @@@ bool blk_rq_merge_ok(struct request *rq
  	if (!bio_crypt_rq_ctx_compatible(rq, bio))
  		return false;
  
- 	/* must be using the same buffer */
- 	if (req_op(rq) == REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME &&
- 	    !blk_write_same_mergeable(rq->bio, bio))
 -	/*
 -	 * Don't allow merge of different write hints, or for a hint with
 -	 * non-hint IO.
 -	 */
 -	if (rq->write_hint != bio->bi_write_hint)
--		return false;
--
  	if (rq->ioprio != bio_prio(bio))
  		return false;
  

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped