The patch titled
Subject: fs/buffer: replace ll_rw_block()
has been added to the -mm mm-unstable branch. Its filename is
fs-buffer-replace-ll_rw_block.patch
This patch will shortly appear at
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/25-new.git/tree/patches/fs-buffer-replace-ll_rw_block.patch
This patch will later appear in the mm-unstable branch at
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst when testing your code ***
The -mm tree is included into linux-next via the mm-everything
branch at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm
and is updated there every 2-3 working days
------------------------------------------------------
From: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: fs/buffer: replace ll_rw_block()
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 21:34:54 +0800
ll_rw_block() is not safe for the sync IO path because it skip buffers
which has been locked by others, it could lead to false positive EIO
when submitting read IO. So stop using ll_rw_block(), switch to use new
helpers which could guarantee buffer locked and submit IO if needed.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220901133505.2510834-4-yi.zhang@xxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/buffer.c | 12 +++++-------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/buffer.c~fs-buffer-replace-ll_rw_block
+++ a/fs/buffer.c
@@ -562,7 +562,7 @@ void write_boundary_block(struct block_d
struct buffer_head *bh = __find_get_block(bdev, bblock + 1, blocksize);
if (bh) {
if (buffer_dirty(bh))
- ll_rw_block(REQ_OP_WRITE, 1, &bh);
+ write_dirty_buffer(bh, 0);
put_bh(bh);
}
}
@@ -1342,7 +1342,7 @@ void __breadahead(struct block_device *b
{
struct buffer_head *bh = __getblk(bdev, block, size);
if (likely(bh)) {
- ll_rw_block(REQ_OP_READ | REQ_RAHEAD, 1, &bh);
+ bh_readahead(bh, REQ_RAHEAD);
brelse(bh);
}
}
@@ -2022,7 +2022,7 @@ int __block_write_begin_int(struct folio
if (!buffer_uptodate(bh) && !buffer_delay(bh) &&
!buffer_unwritten(bh) &&
(block_start < from || block_end > to)) {
- ll_rw_block(REQ_OP_READ, 1, &bh);
+ bh_read_nowait(bh, 0);
*wait_bh++=bh;
}
}
@@ -2582,11 +2582,9 @@ int block_truncate_page(struct address_s
set_buffer_uptodate(bh);
if (!buffer_uptodate(bh) && !buffer_delay(bh) && !buffer_unwritten(bh)) {
- err = -EIO;
- ll_rw_block(REQ_OP_READ, 1, &bh);
- wait_on_buffer(bh);
+ err = bh_read(bh, 0);
/* Uhhuh. Read error. Complain and punt. */
- if (!buffer_uptodate(bh))
+ if (err < 0)
goto unlock;
}
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from yi.zhang@xxxxxxxxxx are
fs-buffer-remove-__breadahead_gfp.patch
fs-buffer-add-some-new-buffer-read-helpers.patch
fs-buffer-replace-ll_rw_block.patch
gfs2-replace-ll_rw_block.patch
isofs-replace-ll_rw_block.patch
jbd2-replace-ll_rw_block.patch
ntfs3-replace-ll_rw_block.patch
ocfs2-replace-ll_rw_block.patch
reiserfs-replace-ll_rw_block.patch
udf-replace-ll_rw_block.patch
ufs-replace-ll_rw_block.patch
fs-buffer-remove-ll_rw_block-helper.patch
ext2-replace-bh_submit_read-helper-with-bh_read_locked.patch
fs-buffer-remove-bh_submit_read-helper.patch
