* Dave Hansen ([email protected]) wrote:
> On 10/07/2013 01:21 PM, Robert C Jennings wrote:
> >             spd.partial[page_nr].offset = loff;
> >             spd.partial[page_nr].len = this_len;
> > +           spd.partial[page_nr].useraddr = index << PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
> >             len -= this_len;
> >             loff = 0;
> >             spd.nr_pages++;
> > @@ -656,6 +702,7 @@ ssize_t default_file_splice_read(struct file *in, 
> > loff_t *ppos,
> >             this_len = min_t(size_t, vec[i].iov_len, res);
> >             spd.partial[i].offset = 0;
> >             spd.partial[i].len = this_len;
> > +           spd.partial[i].useraddr = (unsigned long)vec[i].iov_base;
> >             if (!this_len) {
> >                     __free_page(spd.pages[i]);
> >                     spd.pages[i] = NULL;
> > @@ -1475,6 +1522,8 @@ static int get_iovec_page_array(const struct iovec 
> > __user *iov,
> >  
> >                     partial[buffers].offset = off;
> >                     partial[buffers].len = plen;
> > +                   partial[buffers].useraddr = (unsigned long)base;
> > +                   base = (void*)((unsigned long)base + PAGE_SIZE);
> >  
> >                     off = 0;
> >                     len -= plen;
> > diff --git a/include/linux/splice.h b/include/linux/splice.h
> > index 74575cb..56661e3 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/splice.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/splice.h
> > @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ struct partial_page {
> >     unsigned int offset;
> >     unsigned int len;
> >     unsigned long private;
> > +   unsigned long useraddr;
> >  };
> 
> "useraddr" confuses me.  You make it an 'unsigned long', yet two of the
> three assignments are from "void __user *".  The other assignment:
> 
>       spd.partial[page_nr].useraddr = index << PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
> 
> 'index' looks to be the offset inside the file, not a user address, so
> I'm confused what that is doing.
> 
> Could you elaborate a little more on why 'useraddr' is suddenly needed
> in these patches?  How is "index << PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT" a virtual address?
>  Also, are we losing any of the advantages of sparse checking since
> 'useraddr' is without the __user annotation?
> 

I'm working on cleaning this up.  Trying to remove useraddr altogher
through the use of the existing 'private' field just for the
splice_to_user/pipe_to_user flow without upsetting other uses of the
private field.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to