From dd05add7b2b6004c5fa3a1f276f56d8668f86b65 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paulo Alcantara Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2026 19:20:30 -0300 Subject: netfs: zero the tail of a short DIO/unbuffered read 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 Reviewed-by: Namjae Jeon Signed-off-by: Paulo Alcantara Cc: Christian Brauner Cc: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Ronnie Sahlberg Cc: Shyam Prasad N Cc: Tom Talpey Cc: Bharath SM Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org --- Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst | 72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 72 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst (limited to 'Documentation/process/maintainer-devicetree.rst') 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. + -- cgit v1.3.1