Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933463AbcKIPrV (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Nov 2016 10:47:21 -0500 Received: from b.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.144]:44723 "EHLO radon.swed.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933095AbcKIPrU (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Nov 2016 10:47:20 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] drbd: Fix kernel_sendmsg() usage To: Jens Axboe , wolfgang.glas@iteg.at, christoph.lechleitner@iteg.at, philipp.reisner@linbit.com, stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com References: <1478601789-15060-1-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <1478601789-15060-1-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <497abc52-093f-17ea-5fb5-645030a23a01@nod.at> <20161108165204.GC2834@kernel.dk> <20161109153209.GK1382@soda.linbit> From: Richard Weinberger Message-ID: Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 16:47:15 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161109153209.GK1382@soda.linbit> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1870 Lines: 44 On 09.11.2016 16:32, Lars Ellenberg wrote: > On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 09:52:04AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>> This should go into 4.9, >>>> and into all stable branches since and including v4.0, >>>> which is the first to contain the exposing change. >>>> >>>> It is correct for all stable branches older than that as well >>>> (which contain the DRBD driver; which is 2.6.33 and up). >>>> >>>> It requires a small "conflict" resolution for v4.4 and earlier, with v4.5 >>>> we dropped the comment block immediately preceding the kernel_sendmsg(). >>>> >>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >>>> Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk >>>> Cc: christoph.lechleitner@iteg.at >>>> Cc: wolfgang.glas@iteg.at >>>> Reported-by: Christoph Lechleitner >>>> Tested-by: Christoph Lechleitner >>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger >>>> Signed-off-by: Lars Ellenberg >>> >>> Changing my patch is perfectly fine, but please clearly state it. >>> I.e. by adding something like that before your S-o-b. >>> [Lars: Massaged patch to match my personal taste...] >> > >> Lars, are you sending a new one? If you do, add the stable tag as well. > > So my "change" against his original patch was > - rv = kernel_sendmsg(sock, &msg, &iov, 1, size - sent); > + rv = kernel_sendmsg(sock, &msg, &iov, 1, iov.iov_len); > to make it "more obviously correct" from looking just at the one line > without even having to read the context. And a more verbose commit message. > > If that requires yet additional noise, sure, so be it :) > > Should I sent two patches, one that applies to 4.5 and later, > and one that applies to 2.6.33 ... 4.4, or are you or stable > willing to resolve the trivial "missing comment block" conflict yourself? BTW: Why did you drop the "Fixes:" tag too? Thanks, //richard