netfs: zero the tail of a short DIO/unbuffered readgrafted

The buffered read collector zero-fills the tail of a short read that
stops below the inode's i_size (netfs_clear_unread()), so a read that
races an extending write still returns the expected number of bytes.
The non-buffered collector path does no such thing: it just records
how much was transferred.

Add the same zero-fill for the non-buffered case, gated on
NETFS_SREQ_CLEAR_TAIL: a subreq's source sets that flag when a short
result from it is known to be safe to treat as a hole, as opposed to
NETFS_SREQ_HIT_EOF, which means the read genuinely ran off the end of
the file and should be reported short as-is. Only CLEAR_TAIL should
zero-fill here; a real EOF must stay a real short read.

No source currently sets CLEAR_TAIL on an unbuffered/DIO subrequest,
so this is inert on its own -- a following change teaches cifs to set
it in the one case that needs it.

Fixes: e2d46f2ec332 ("netfs: Change the read result collector to only use one work item")
Reviewed-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Paulo Alcantara <pc@manguebit.org>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Ronnie Sahlberg <ronniesahlberg@gmail.com>
Cc: Shyam Prasad N <sprasad@microsoft.com>
Cc: Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>
Cc: Bharath SM <bharathsm@microsoft.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org

1 files changed, 72 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..ecc3ed638
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+======================================
+Devicetree and Open Firmware Subsystem
+======================================
+
+Other Process Documents
+-----------------------
+
+Please see the documents in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ for information
+on how to write proper Devicetree bindings and how to submit patches.
+
+Patch Review and Handling
+-------------------------
+
+Patches handled by Devicetree maintainers are processed differently depending
+on the patch type:
+
+1. Core OF driver code, e.g. drivers/of/:
+   patches are reviewed and applied by DT maintainers.
+
+2. Devicetree bindings:
+   patches are reviewed by DT maintainers, but should be applied by subsystem
+   maintainers except in certain cases.  See also *For kernel maintainers* in
+   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst.
+
+3. DTS and drivers:
+   DT maintainers might provide comments, but review is generally not expected.
+   DTS must pass schema checks (dtbs_check) or at least do not add any
+   new warnings.
+
+Patchwork
+~~~~~~~~~
+
+Devicetree maintainers review patches using Patchwork, so the current status of
+a patch can be checked there. For typical driver submissions, Patchwork
+receives the entire patch set, but only a few patches are usually Devicetree
+bindings that are reviewed by DT maintainers.
+
+Explanation of Patchwork statuses:
+
+ - **New**: Not yet processed by the automation toolset.
+ - **Needs ACK**: Waiting for review by DT maintainers.
+ - **Handled Elsewhere**: Non-DT patch; not being reviewed here.
+ - **RFC**: Patch was likely ignored because it was an incomplete RFC.
+ - **Changes Requested**: Patch was reviewed and DT maintainers expect changes.
+ - **Accepted**: Patch was reviewed and applied by DT maintainers to their tree.
+ - **Not Applicable**: Patch was reviewed and is likely in good shape, with a
+   *Reviewed-by* or *Acked-by* tag provided, but DT maintainers expect someone
+   else to apply it.
+
+Patch Re-review and Pinging
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Due to the high volume of email traffic, Devicetree maintainers do not read
+every email they receive and instead rely on Patchwork during the review
+process. They also often skip patches that have already been reviewed.
+
+As a result, maintainers might miss:
+
+1. Questions about already reviewed patches.
+2. Pings, for example when a patch has been reviewed by DT maintainers but has
+   not been picked up by subsystem maintainers.
+
+Such cases can be addressed by:
+
+1. Pinging DT maintainers on the IRC channel.
+2. Dropping the DT maintainer’s *Acked-by* or *Reviewed-by* tag when sending a new
+   version of the patch set, together with an explanation in the patch
+   changelog describing why the tag was removed and what is expected from DT
+   maintainers.
+