On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 9:28 PM Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 09:20:32PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 4:04 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:15:12PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > > http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/xfs.git/shortlog/refs/heads/xfs-ioctl-table > > > > > > > > Lots to like in that handful of patches. :) > > > > > > > > It can easily go before or after Arnd's patch, and the merge > > > > conflict either way would be minor, so I'm not really fussed either > > > > way this gets sorted out... > > > > > > The other thing we could do is to just pick the two important ones: > > > > > > http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/xfs.git/shortlog/refs/heads/xfs-ioctl-table-5.3 > > > > > > and throw that into Arnds series, or even 5.3, and then defer the > > > table thing until later. > > > > If we can have your "xfs: fall back to native ioctls for unhandled compat > > ones" in 5.3, that would be ideal from my side, then I can just drop the > > corresponding patch from my series and have the rest merged for 5.4. > > > > The compat_ptr addition is independent of my series, I just added it > > because I noticed it was missing, so we can merged that through > > the xfs tree along with your other changes, either for 5.3 or 5.4. > > Er... do the two patches in the -5.3 branch actually fix something > that's broken? I sense s390 is missing a pointer sanitization check or > something...? s390 is indeed missing the pointer conversion, the other patch adds compat ioctl support for FS_IOC_GETFSLABEL and FS_IOC_SETFSLABEL, which were missing, and it ensures that FITRIM keeps working after I remove it from the list in fs/compat_ioctl.c Arnd
