[PATCH 13/13] fs: don't change the address limit for ->read_iter in __kernel_read

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



If we read to a file that implements ->read_iter there is no need
to change the address limit if we send a kvec down.  Implement that
case, and prefer it over using plain ->read with a changed address
limit if available.

Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
---
 fs/read_write.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/read_write.c b/fs/read_write.c
index 1d43da8554dc0d..3bde37aa63db6c 100644
--- a/fs/read_write.c
+++ b/fs/read_write.c
@@ -421,7 +421,6 @@ static ssize_t new_sync_read(struct file *filp, char __user *buf, size_t len, lo
 
 ssize_t __kernel_read(struct file *file, void *buf, size_t count, loff_t *pos)
 {
-	mm_segment_t old_fs = get_fs();
 	ssize_t ret;
 
 	if (!(file->f_mode & FMODE_CAN_READ))
@@ -429,14 +428,25 @@ ssize_t __kernel_read(struct file *file, void *buf, size_t count, loff_t *pos)
 
 	if (count > MAX_RW_COUNT)
 		count =  MAX_RW_COUNT;
-	set_fs(KERNEL_DS);
-	if (file->f_op->read)
+	if (file->f_op->read_iter) {
+		struct kvec iov = { .iov_base = buf, .iov_len = count };
+		struct kiocb kiocb;
+		struct iov_iter iter;
+
+		init_sync_kiocb(&kiocb, file);
+		kiocb.ki_pos = *pos;
+		iov_iter_kvec(&iter, READ, &iov, 1, count);
+		ret = file->f_op->read_iter(&kiocb, &iter);
+		*pos = kiocb.ki_pos;
+	} else if (file->f_op->read) {
+		mm_segment_t old_fs = get_fs();
+
+		set_fs(KERNEL_DS);
 		ret = file->f_op->read(file, (void __user *)buf, count, pos);
-	else if (file->f_op->read_iter)
-		ret = new_sync_read(file, (void __user *)buf, count, pos);
-	else
+		set_fs(old_fs);
+	} else {
 		ret = -EINVAL;
-	set_fs(old_fs);
+	}
 	if (ret > 0) {
 		fsnotify_access(file);
 		add_rchar(current, ret);
-- 
2.26.2




[Index of Archives]     [Netfitler Users]     [Berkeley Packet Filter]     [LARTC]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]

  Powered by Linux