netdev - linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the net-next 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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230613125939.595e50b8@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2023 12:59:39 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
 Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List
 <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the net-next tree

Hi all,

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

  fs/splice.c

between commit:

  2bfc66850952 ("splice, net: Add a splice_eof op to file-ops and socket-ops")

from the net-next tree and commit:

  6a3f30b8bdb2 ("splice: Make do_splice_to() generic and export it")

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/splice.c
index 67ddaac1f5c5,2420ead610a7..000000000000
--- a/fs/splice.c
+++ b/fs/splice.c
@@@ -969,23 -841,24 +937,35 @@@ static long do_splice_from(struct pipe_
  	return out->f_op->splice_write(pipe, out, ppos, len, flags);
  }
  
 +/*
 + * Indicate to the caller that there was a premature EOF when reading from the
 + * source and the caller didn't indicate they would be sending more data after
 + * this.
 + */
 +static void do_splice_eof(struct splice_desc *sd)
 +{
 +	if (sd->splice_eof)
 +		sd->splice_eof(sd);
 +}
 +
- /*
-  * Attempt to initiate a splice from a file to a pipe.
+ /**
+  * vfs_splice_read - Read data from a file and splice it into a pipe
+  * @in:		File to splice from
+  * @ppos:	Input file offset
+  * @pipe:	Pipe to splice to
+  * @len:	Number of bytes to splice
+  * @flags:	Splice modifier flags (SPLICE_F_*)
+  *
+  * Splice the requested amount of data from the input file to the pipe.  This
+  * is synchronous as the caller must hold the pipe lock across the entire
+  * operation.
+  *
+  * If successful, it returns the amount of data spliced, 0 if it hit the EOF or
+  * a hole and a negative error code otherwise.
   */
- static long do_splice_to(struct file *in, loff_t *ppos,
- 			 struct pipe_inode_info *pipe, size_t len,
- 			 unsigned int flags)
+ long vfs_splice_read(struct file *in, loff_t *ppos,
+ 		     struct pipe_inode_info *pipe, size_t len,
+ 		     unsigned int flags)
  {
  	unsigned int p_space;
  	int ret;
@@@ -1081,9 -959,9 +1070,9 @@@ ssize_t splice_direct_to_actor(struct f
  		size_t read_len;
  		loff_t pos = sd->pos, prev_pos = pos;
  
- 		ret = do_splice_to(in, &pos, pipe, len, flags);
+ 		ret = vfs_splice_read(in, &pos, pipe, len, flags);
  		if (unlikely(ret <= 0))
 -			goto out_release;
 +			goto read_failure;
  
  		read_len = ret;
  		sd->total_len = read_len;

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped