[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YrqpEZV3yu31t6E2@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 09:09:05 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.18 112/181] vmcore: convert copy_oldmem_page() to take
an iov_iter
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 06:27:12PM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 01:21:25PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > From: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@...radead.org>
> >
> > [ Upstream commit 5d8de293c224896a4da99763fce4f9794308caf4 ]
> >
> > Patch series "Convert vmcore to use an iov_iter", v5.
> >
> > For some reason several people have been sending bad patches to fix
> > compiler warnings in vmcore recently. Here's how it should be done.
> > Compile-tested only on x86. As noted in the first patch, s390 should take
> > this conversion a bit further, but I'm not inclined to do that work
> > myself.
> >
> > This patch (of 3):
> >
> > Instead of passing in a 'buf' and 'userbuf' argument, pass in an iov_iter.
> > s390 needs more work to pass the iov_iter down further, or refactor, but
> > I'd be more comfortable if someone who can test on s390 did that work.
> >
> > It's more convenient to convert the whole of read_from_oldmem() to take an
> > iov_iter at the same time, so rename it to read_from_oldmem_iter() and add
> > a temporary read_from_oldmem() wrapper that creates an iov_iter.
> >
> > Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220408090636.560886-1-bhe@redhat.com
> > Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220408090636.560886-2-bhe@redhat.com
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@...radead.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
> > Cc: Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
> > ---
> > arch/arm/kernel/crash_dump.c | 27 +++-------------
> > arch/arm64/kernel/crash_dump.c | 29 +++--------------
> > arch/ia64/kernel/crash_dump.c | 32 +++----------------
> > arch/mips/kernel/crash_dump.c | 27 +++-------------
> > arch/powerpc/kernel/crash_dump.c | 35 +++------------------
> > arch/riscv/kernel/crash_dump.c | 26 +++------------
> > arch/s390/kernel/crash_dump.c | 13 +++++---
> > arch/sh/kernel/crash_dump.c | 29 +++--------------
> > arch/x86/kernel/crash_dump_32.c | 29 +++--------------
> > arch/x86/kernel/crash_dump_64.c | 41 +++++++-----------------
> > fs/proc/vmcore.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++------------
> > include/linux/crash_dump.h | 9 +++---
> > 12 files changed, 91 insertions(+), 260 deletions(-)
>
> This one breaks s390. You would also need to apply the following two commits:
>
> cc02e6e21aa5 ("s390/crash: add missing iterator advance in copy_oldmem_page()")
> af2debd58bd7 ("s390/crash: make copy_oldmem_page() return number of bytes copied")
Both of them are also in the 5.18-rc queue here, right?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists