Missing 5.10/5.15 stable patches

Missing 5.10/5.15 stable patches

[Jens Axboe]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 287 bytes --]

Hi Greg,

As mentioned, two of them could be discarded. Here are the 4 that should
indeed get applied, ported to 5.10/15 stable and tested. The series
applies cleanly to both trees, so just sending one set rather than applying
to the individual "failed to apply" emails.

-- 
Jens Axboe

[-- Attachment #2: 0003-io_uring-rw-ensure-kiocb_end_write-is-always-called.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 3308 bytes --]

From 847059841bf49921adc58c31b910b52e46568e3e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2023 10:36:37 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] io_uring/rw: ensure kiocb_end_write() is always called

commit 2ec33a6c3cca9fe2465e82050c81f5ffdc508b36 upstream.

A previous commit moved the notifications and end-write handling, but
it is now missing a few spots where we also want to call both of those.
Without that, we can potentially be missing file notifications, and
more importantly, have an imbalance in the super_block writers sem
accounting.

Fixes: b000145e9907 ("io_uring/rw: defer fsnotify calls to task context")
Reported-by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221010050319.GC2703033@dread.disaster.area/
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
---
 io_uring/io_uring.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
index 15d9d9288d27..2e2559c82507 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
@@ -2703,11 +2703,34 @@ static bool io_rw_should_reissue(struct io_kiocb *req)
 }
 #endif
 
+/*
+ * Trigger the notifications after having done some IO, and finish the write
+ * accounting, if any.
+ */
+static void io_req_io_end(struct io_kiocb *req)
+{
+	struct io_rw *rw = &req->rw;
+
+	WARN_ON(!in_task());
+
+	if (rw->kiocb.ki_flags & IOCB_WRITE) {
+		kiocb_end_write(req);
+		fsnotify_modify(req->file);
+	} else {
+		fsnotify_access(req->file);
+	}
+}
+
 static bool __io_complete_rw_common(struct io_kiocb *req, long res)
 {
 	if (res != req->result) {
 		if ((res == -EAGAIN || res == -EOPNOTSUPP) &&
 		    io_rw_should_reissue(req)) {
+			/*
+			 * Reissue will start accounting again, finish the
+			 * current cycle.
+			 */
+			io_req_io_end(req);
 			req->flags |= REQ_F_REISSUE;
 			return true;
 		}
@@ -2749,25 +2772,9 @@ static void io_req_task_complete(struct io_kiocb *req, bool *locked)
 	}
 }
 
-static void __io_complete_rw(struct io_kiocb *req, long res, long res2,
-			     unsigned int issue_flags)
-{
-	if (__io_complete_rw_common(req, res))
-		return;
-	__io_req_complete(req, issue_flags, io_fixup_rw_res(req, res), io_put_rw_kbuf(req));
-}
-
 static void io_req_rw_complete(struct io_kiocb *req, bool *locked)
 {
-	struct io_rw *rw = &req->rw;
-
-	if (rw->kiocb.ki_flags & IOCB_WRITE) {
-		kiocb_end_write(req);
-		fsnotify_modify(req->file);
-	} else {
-		fsnotify_access(req->file);
-	}
-
+	io_req_io_end(req);
 	io_req_task_complete(req, locked);
 }
 
@@ -3036,10 +3043,20 @@ static void kiocb_done(struct kiocb *kiocb, ssize_t ret,
 
 	if (req->flags & REQ_F_CUR_POS)
 		req->file->f_pos = kiocb->ki_pos;
-	if (ret >= 0 && (kiocb->ki_complete == io_complete_rw))
-		__io_complete_rw(req, ret, 0, issue_flags);
-	else
+	if (ret >= 0 && (kiocb->ki_complete == io_complete_rw)) {
+		if (!__io_complete_rw_common(req, ret)) {
+			/*
+			 * Safe to call io_end from here as we're inline
+			 * from the submission path.
+			 */
+			io_req_io_end(req);
+			__io_req_complete(req, issue_flags,
+					  io_fixup_rw_res(req, ret),
+					  io_put_rw_kbuf(req));
+		}
+	} else {
 		io_rw_done(kiocb, ret);
+	}
 
 	if (req->flags & REQ_F_REISSUE) {
 		req->flags &= ~REQ_F_REISSUE;
-- 
2.39.0


[-- Attachment #3: 0002-io_uring-fix-double-poll-leak-on-repolling.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1455 bytes --]

From 25143ba20b82094e275abe38b44b7e1ade886a92 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2023 10:24:20 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] io_uring: fix double poll leak on repolling

commit c0737fa9a5a5cf5a053bcc983f72d58919b997c6 upstream.

We have re-polling for partial IO, so a request can be polled twice. If
it used two poll entries the first time then on the second
io_arm_poll_handler() it will find the old apoll entry and NULL
kmalloc()'ed second entry, i.e. apoll->double_poll, so leaking it.

Fixes: 10c873334feba ("io_uring: allow re-poll if we made progress")
Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/fee2452494222ecc7f1f88c8fb659baef971414a.1655852245.git.asml.silence@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
---
 io_uring/io_uring.c | 6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
index 24639c4fa538..15d9d9288d27 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
@@ -5895,10 +5895,12 @@ static int io_arm_poll_handler(struct io_kiocb *req)
 		mask |= POLLOUT | POLLWRNORM;
 	}
 
-	if (req->flags & REQ_F_POLLED)
+	if (req->flags & REQ_F_POLLED) {
 		apoll = req->apoll;
-	else
+		kfree(apoll->double_poll);
+	} else {
 		apoll = kmalloc(sizeof(*apoll), GFP_ATOMIC);
+	}
 	if (unlikely(!apoll))
 		return IO_APOLL_ABORTED;
 	apoll->double_poll = NULL;
-- 
2.39.0


[-- Attachment #4: 0001-io_uring-Clean-up-a-false-positive-warning-from-GCC-.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 2390 bytes --]

From f79aabb5fcef594b03b9c7d790640833d95b0604 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Alviro Iskandar Setiawan <alviro.iskandar@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2022 21:05:33 +0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] io_uring: Clean up a false-positive warning from GCC
 9.3.0

commit 0d7c1153d9291197c1dc473cfaade77acb874b4b upstream.

In io_recv(), if import_single_range() fails, the @flags variable is
uninitialized, then it will goto out_free.

After the goto, the compiler doesn't know that (ret < min_ret) is
always true, so it thinks the "if ((flags & MSG_WAITALL) ..."  path
could be taken.

The complaint comes from gcc-9 (Debian 9.3.0-22) 9.3.0:
```
  fs/io_uring.c:5238 io_recvfrom() error: uninitialized symbol 'flags'
```
Fix this by bypassing the @ret and @flags check when
import_single_range() fails.

Reasons:
 1. import_single_range() only returns -EFAULT when it fails.
 2. At that point, @flags is uninitialized and shouldn't be read.

Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Reported-by: "Chen, Rong A" <rong.a.chen@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.gnuweeb.org/timl/d33bb5a9-8173-f65b-f653-51fc0681c6d6@intel.com/
Cc: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Ammar Faizi <ammarfaizi2@gnuweeb.org>
Fixes: 7297ce3d59449de49d3c9e1f64ae25488750a1fc ("io_uring: improve send/recv error handling")
Signed-off-by: Alviro Iskandar Setiawan <alviro.iskandar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ammar Faizi <ammarfaizi2@gnuweeb.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220207140533.565411-1-ammarfaizi2@gnuweeb.org
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
---
 io_uring/io_uring.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
index 78ed38d778f8..24639c4fa538 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
@@ -5239,7 +5239,6 @@ static int io_recv(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
 		min_ret = iov_iter_count(&msg.msg_iter);
 
 	ret = sock_recvmsg(sock, &msg, flags);
-out_free:
 	if (ret < min_ret) {
 		if (ret == -EAGAIN && force_nonblock)
 			return -EAGAIN;
@@ -5254,6 +5253,7 @@ static int io_recv(struct io_kiocb *req, unsigned int issue_flags)
 		}
 		req_set_fail(req);
 	} else if ((flags & MSG_WAITALL) && (msg.msg_flags & (MSG_TRUNC | MSG_CTRUNC))) {
+out_free:
 		req_set_fail(req);
 	}
 	if (req->flags & REQ_F_BUFFER_SELECTED)
-- 
2.39.0


[-- Attachment #5: 0004-io_uring-rw-remove-leftover-debug-statement.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1030 bytes --]

From e07a8781fe8045af3b8b277aaae735a8f4011b09 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 17:24:10 -0600
Subject: [PATCH 4/4] io_uring/rw: remove leftover debug statement

commit 5c61795ea97c170347c5c4af0c159bd877b8af71 upstream.

This debug statement was never meant to go into the upstream release,
kill it off before it ends up in a release. It was just part of the
testing for the initial version of the patch.

Fixes: 2ec33a6c3cca ("io_uring/rw: ensure kiocb_end_write() is always called")
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
---
 io_uring/io_uring.c | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
index 2e2559c82507..a866111aef3f 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
@@ -2711,8 +2711,6 @@ static void io_req_io_end(struct io_kiocb *req)
 {
 	struct io_rw *rw = &req->rw;
 
-	WARN_ON(!in_task());
-
 	if (rw->kiocb.ki_flags & IOCB_WRITE) {
 		kiocb_end_write(req);
 		fsnotify_modify(req->file);
-- 
2.39.0

Re: Missing 5.10/5.15 stable patches

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 10:47:42AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> As mentioned, two of them could be discarded. Here are the 4 that should
> indeed get applied, ported to 5.10/15 stable and tested. The series
> applies cleanly to both trees, so just sending one set rather than applying
> to the individual "failed to apply" emails.

Thanks for these, all now queued up!

greg k-h

Re: Missing 5.10/5.15 stable patches

[Jens Axboe]

On 1/23/23 2:49 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 10:47:42AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>> As mentioned, two of them could be discarded. Here are the 4 that should
>> indeed get applied, ported to 5.10/15 stable and tested. The series
>> applies cleanly to both trees, so just sending one set rather than applying
>> to the individual "failed to apply" emails.
> 
> Thanks for these, all now queued up!

Thanks Greg!

-- 
Jens Axboe