On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 08:30:40AM -0700, Greg Hackmann wrote:
> On 04/06/2017 07:30 AM, zhangshuxiaomi@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: zhangshuxiao <zhangshuxiao@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > vfs_llseek will check whether the file mode has
> > FMODE_LSEEK, no return failure. But ashmem can be
> > lseek, so add FMODE_LSEEK to ashmem file.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shuxiao Zhang <zhangshuxiao@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Tested-by: Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c b/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c
> > index 3f11332..e4530ac 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/android/ashmem.c
> > @@ -392,6 +392,7 @@ static int ashmem_mmap(struct file *file, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> > ret = PTR_ERR(vmfile);
> > goto out;
> > }
> > + vmfile->f_mode |= FMODE_LSEEK;
> > asma->file = vmfile;
> > }
> > get_file(asma->file);
> >
>
> This commit message is missing some important context.
>
> ashmem_llseek() passes the llseek() call through to the backing shmem file.
> 91360b02ab48 ("ashmem: use vfs_llseek()") changed this from directly calling
> the file's llseek() op into a VFS layer call. This also adds a check for
> the FMODE_LSEEK bit, so without that bit ashmem_llseek() now always fails
> with -ESPIPE.
>
> I've tested that this patch fixes the regression on both hikey running AOSP
> and User Mode Linux running Debian.
Thanks for letting me know, I'll update the changelog a bit. How far
back does this patch need to go in stable kernel releases?
thanks,
greg k-h
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
