On 1/6/25 11:13, lizetao wrote:
...
/* sqe->attr_type_mask flags */
-#define IORING_RW_ATTR_FLAG_PI (1U << 0)
+#define IORING_RW_ATTR_FLAG_PI (1UL << 0)
+#define IORING_RW_ATTR_REGISTERED (1UL << 63)
Why use (1UL << 63) instead of (1UL << 1) here?
They serve different purposes, think how you'd be iterating
more attribute types, calculating the total size, etc.
diff --git a/io_uring/rw.c b/io_uring/rw.c index dc1acaf95db1..b1db4595788b
100644
--- a/io_uring/rw.c
+++ b/io_uring/rw.c
@@ -271,10 +271,17 @@ static int io_prep_rw_pi(struct io_kiocb *req, struct
io_rw *rw, int ddir,
size_t pi_len;
int ret;
- if (copy_from_user(&__pi_attr, u64_to_user_ptr(attr_ptr),
- sizeof(pi_attr)))
- return -EFAULT;
- pi_attr = &__pi_attr;
+ if (attr_type_mask & IORING_RW_ATTR_REGISTERED) {
+ pi_attr = io_args_get_ptr(&req->ctx->sqe_args, attr_ptr,
+ sizeof(pi_attr));
Here pi_attr is just pointer, so maybe sizeof(__pi_attr) or sizeof(struct io_uring_attr_pi) will be better.
Good catch, and that's an issue from 3/4. As noted it's not even
tested and posted to discuss the API. I'd even prefer them to be
thrown away, and for Anuj / Kanchan to take over if that's
interesting.
--
Pavel Begunkov
