linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] io_uring/net: use REQ_F_IMPORT_BUFFER for send

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9770387a-9726-4905-9166-253ec02507ff@kernel.dk>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 11:05:03 -0600
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: Caleb Sander Mateos <csander@...estorage.com>,
 Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
Cc: io-uring@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] io_uring/net: use REQ_F_IMPORT_BUFFER for send_zc

On 3/26/25 11:01 AM, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 2:59?AM Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 3/25/25 14:39, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote:
>>> Instead of a bool field in struct io_sr_msg, use REQ_F_IMPORT_BUFFER to
>>> track whether io_send_zc() has already imported the buffer. This flag
>>> already serves a similar purpose for sendmsg_zc and {read,write}v_fixed.
>>
>> It didn't apply cleanly to for-6.15/io_uring-reg-vec, but otherwise
>> looks good.
> 
> It looks like Jens dropped my earlier patch "io_uring/net: import
> send_zc fixed buffer before going async":
> https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/20250321184819.3847386-3-csander@purestorage.com/T/#u
> .
> Not sure why it was dropped. But this change is independent, I can
> rebase it onto the current for-6.15/io_uring-reg-vec if desired.

Mostly just around the discussion on what we want to guarantee here. I
do think that patch makes sense, fwiw!

>> Reviewed-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
> 
> Thanks!
> 
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Caleb Sander Mateos <csander@...estorage.com>
>>> Suggested-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
>>
>> Note for the future, it's a good practice to put your sob last.
> 
> Okay. Is the preferred order of tags documented anywhere? I ran
> scripts/checkpatch.pl, but it didn't have any complaints.

I think that one is minor, as it's not reordering with another SOB. Eg
mine would go below it anyway. But you definitely should always include
a list of what changed since v1 when posting v2, and so forth. Otherwise
you need to find the old patch and compare them to see what changed.
Just put it below the --- line in the email.

-- 
Jens Axboe