Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with Linus' tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 14:05:44 +1000

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in:

  fs/io_uring.c

between commits:

  4eb8dded6b82 ("io_uring: fix openat/openat2 unified prep handling")
  f5cac8b156e8 ("io_uring: don't use retry based buffered reads for non-async bdev")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  76c917267129 ("io_uring: get rid of req->io/io_async_ctx union")
  8f95cf7f28bf ("io_uring: enable file table usage for SQPOLL rings")

from the block tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc fs/io_uring.c
index c9aea6c44372,7ee5e18218c2..000000000000
--- a/fs/io_uring.c
+++ b/fs/io_uring.c
@@@ -3128,12 -3172,12 +3187,13 @@@ static int io_read(struct io_kiocb *req
  	struct iovec inline_vecs[UIO_FASTIOV], *iovec = inline_vecs;
  	struct kiocb *kiocb = &req->rw.kiocb;
  	struct iov_iter __iter, *iter = &__iter;
+ 	struct io_async_rw *rw = req->async_data;
  	ssize_t io_size, ret, ret2;
  	size_t iov_count;
 +	bool no_async;
  
- 	if (req->io)
- 		iter = &req->io->rw.iter;
+ 	if (rw)
+ 		iter = &rw->iter;
  
  	ret = io_import_iovec(READ, req, &iovec, iter, !force_nonblock);
  	if (ret < 0)
@@@ -3193,8 -3236,7 +3253,9 @@@ copy_iov
  		ret = ret2;
  		goto out_free;
  	}
 +	if (no_async)
 +		return -EAGAIN;
+ 	rw = req->async_data;
  	/* it's copied and will be cleaned with ->io */
  	iovec = NULL;
  	/* now use our persistent iterator, if we aren't already */