diff mbox series

[4/9] fibmap: Use bmap instead of ->bmap method in ioctl_fibmap

Message ID 20190808082744.31405-5-cmaiolino@redhat.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded, archived
Headers show
Series New ->fiemap infrastructure and ->bmap removal | expand

Commit Message

Carlos Maiolino Aug. 8, 2019, 8:27 a.m. UTC
Now we have the possibility of proper error return in bmap, use bmap()
function in ioctl_fibmap() instead of calling ->bmap method directly.

Signed-off-by: Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@redhat.com>
---

Changelog:

	V4:
		- Ensure ioctl_fibmap() returns 0 in case of error returned from
		  bmap(). Otherwise we'll be changing the user interface (which
		  returns 0 in case of error)
	V3:
		- Rename usr_blk to ur_block

	V2:
		- Use a local sector_t variable to asign the block number
		  instead of using direct casting.

 fs/ioctl.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

Comments

Carlos Maiolino Aug. 14, 2019, 11:01 a.m. UTC | #1
Hey folks,

> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
> 
>    fs/ioctl.c: In function 'ioctl_fibmap':
> >> fs/ioctl.c:68:10: error: implicit declaration of function 'bmap'; did you mean 'kmap'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]

Any of you guys may have a better idea on how to fix this?

Essentially, this happens when CONFIG_BLOCK is not set, and although I don't
really see a hard requirement to have bmap() exported only when CONFIG_BLOCK is
set, at the same time, I don't see use for bmap() if CONFIG_BLOCK is not set.

So, I'm in a kind of a chicken-egg problem.

I am considering to just remove the #ifdef CONFIG_BLOCK / #endif from the bmap()
declaration. This will fix the warning, and I don't see any side effects. What
you guys think?


>      error = bmap(inode, &block);
>              ^~~~
>              kmap
>    cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> 
> vim +68 fs/ioctl.c
> 
>     53	
>     54	static int ioctl_fibmap(struct file *filp, int __user *p)
>     55	{
>     56		struct inode *inode = file_inode(filp);
>     57		int error, ur_block;
>     58		sector_t block;
>     59	
>     60		if (!capable(CAP_SYS_RAWIO))
>     61			return -EPERM;
>     62	
>     63		error = get_user(ur_block, p);
>     64		if (error)
>     65			return error;
>     66	
>     67		block = ur_block;
>   > 68		error = bmap(inode, &block);
>     69	
>     70		if (error)
>     71			ur_block = 0;
>     72		else
>     73			ur_block = block;
>     74	
>     75		error = put_user(ur_block, p);
>     76	
>     77		return error;
>     78	}
>     79	
> 
> ---
> 0-DAY kernel test infrastructure                Open Source Technology Center
> https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all                   Intel Corporation
Christoph Hellwig Aug. 14, 2019, 11:08 a.m. UTC | #2
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 01:01:50PM +0200, Carlos Maiolino wrote:
> Hey folks,
> 
> > All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
> > 
> >    fs/ioctl.c: In function 'ioctl_fibmap':
> > >> fs/ioctl.c:68:10: error: implicit declaration of function 'bmap'; did you mean 'kmap'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 
> Any of you guys may have a better idea on how to fix this?
> 
> Essentially, this happens when CONFIG_BLOCK is not set, and although I don't
> really see a hard requirement to have bmap() exported only when CONFIG_BLOCK is
> set, at the same time, I don't see use for bmap() if CONFIG_BLOCK is not set.
> 
> So, I'm in a kind of a chicken-egg problem.
> 
> I am considering to just remove the #ifdef CONFIG_BLOCK / #endif from the bmap()
> declaration. This will fix the warning, and I don't see any side effects. What
> you guys think?

Just provide an inline !CONFIG_BLOCK stub for bmap() in fs.h that always
returns -EINVAL.
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/fs/ioctl.c b/fs/ioctl.c
index fef3a6bf7c78..6b589c873bc2 100644
--- a/fs/ioctl.c
+++ b/fs/ioctl.c
@@ -53,19 +53,28 @@  EXPORT_SYMBOL(vfs_ioctl);
 
 static int ioctl_fibmap(struct file *filp, int __user *p)
 {
-	struct address_space *mapping = filp->f_mapping;
-	int res, block;
+	struct inode *inode = file_inode(filp);
+	int error, ur_block;
+	sector_t block;
 
-	/* do we support this mess? */
-	if (!mapping->a_ops->bmap)
-		return -EINVAL;
 	if (!capable(CAP_SYS_RAWIO))
 		return -EPERM;
-	res = get_user(block, p);
-	if (res)
-		return res;
-	res = mapping->a_ops->bmap(mapping, block);
-	return put_user(res, p);
+
+	error = get_user(ur_block, p);
+	if (error)
+		return error;
+
+	block = ur_block;
+	error = bmap(inode, &block);
+
+	if (error)
+		ur_block = 0;
+	else
+		ur_block = block;
+
+	error = put_user(ur_block, p);
+
+	return error;
 }
 
 /**