linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs-brauner tree with the exfat 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>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAKYAXd_2tMwcdOq_04aESV3dK4sBuG2Fbpv9fvmzkgu4mHkApw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 15:44:34 +0900
From: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...nel.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Dongliang Cui <dongliang.cui@...soc.com>, 
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>, Yuezhang Mo <Yuezhang.Mo@...y.com>, 
	Zhiguo Niu <zhiguo.niu@...soc.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs-brauner tree with the exfat tree

On Tue, Sep 17, 2024 at 7:22 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
Hi Stephen,
>
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 08:10:46 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the vfs-brauner tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >   fs/exfat/inode.c
> >
> > between commits:
> >
> >   3e491faa7648 ("exfat: do not fallback to buffered write")
> >   98ad7b9012b5 ("exfat: Implement sops->shutdown and ioctl")
> >
> > from the exfat tree and commits:
> >
> >   a225800f322a ("fs: Convert aops->write_end to take a folio")
> >   1da86618bdce ("fs: Convert aops->write_begin to take a folio")
> >
> > from the vfs-brauner 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/exfat/inode.c
> > index 7d43a0942911,05f0e07b01d0..000000000000
> > --- a/fs/exfat/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/exfat/inode.c
> > @@@ -428,11 -452,7 +428,10 @@@ static int exfat_write_begin(struct fil
> >   {
> >       int ret;
> >
> >  +    if (unlikely(exfat_forced_shutdown(mapping->host->i_sb)))
> >  +            return -EIO;
> >  +
> > -     *pagep = NULL;
> > -     ret = block_write_begin(mapping, pos, len, pagep, exfat_get_block);
> > +     ret = block_write_begin(mapping, pos, len, foliop, exfat_get_block);
> >
> >       if (ret < 0)
> >               exfat_write_failed(mapping, pos+len);
> > @@@ -448,7 -468,15 +447,7 @@@ static int exfat_write_end(struct file
> >       struct exfat_inode_info *ei = EXFAT_I(inode);
> >       int err;
> >
> > -     err = generic_write_end(file, mapping, pos, len, copied, pagep, fsdata);
> > +     err = generic_write_end(file, mapping, pos, len, copied, folio, fsdata);
> >  -
> >  -    if (ei->i_size_aligned < i_size_read(inode)) {
> >  -            exfat_fs_error(inode->i_sb,
> >  -                    "invalid size(size(%llu) > aligned(%llu)\n",
> >  -                    i_size_read(inode), ei->i_size_aligned);
> >  -            return -EIO;
> >  -    }
> >  -
> >       if (err < len)
> >               exfat_write_failed(mapping, pos+len);
> >
>
> This is now a conflict between the exfat tree and Linus' tree.
I have updated the exfat tree now. There will be no more conflicts.
Please remove your temporary fixes.
Thank you!
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell