Patch "block: check virt boundary in bio_will_gap()" has been added to the 4.4-stable tree

Patch "block: check virt boundary in bio_will_gap()" has been added to the 4.4-stable tree

[gregkh]

This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled

    block: check virt boundary in bio_will_gap()

to the 4.4-stable tree which can be found at:
    http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary

The filename of the patch is:
     block-check-virt-boundary-in-bio_will_gap.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.4 subdirectory.

If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.


>From e0af29171aa8912e1ca95023b75ef336cd70d661 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 23:40:51 +0800
Subject: block: check virt boundary in bio_will_gap()

From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>

commit e0af29171aa8912e1ca95023b75ef336cd70d661 upstream.

In the following patch, the way for figuring out
the last bvec will be changed with a bit cost introduced,
so return immediately if the queue doesn't have virt
boundary limit. Actually most of devices have not
this limit.

Reviewed-by: Sagi Grimberg <sagig@mellanox.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

---
 include/linux/blkdev.h |   16 +++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

--- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
+++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
@@ -1367,6 +1367,13 @@ static inline void put_dev_sector(Sector
 	page_cache_release(p.v);
 }
 
+static inline bool __bvec_gap_to_prev(struct request_queue *q,
+				struct bio_vec *bprv, unsigned int offset)
+{
+	return offset ||
+		((bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q));
+}
+
 /*
  * Check if adding a bio_vec after bprv with offset would create a gap in
  * the SG list. Most drivers don't care about this, but some do.
@@ -1376,18 +1383,17 @@ static inline bool bvec_gap_to_prev(stru
 {
 	if (!queue_virt_boundary(q))
 		return false;
-	return offset ||
-		((bprv->bv_offset + bprv->bv_len) & queue_virt_boundary(q));
+	return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, bprv, offset);
 }
 
 static inline bool bio_will_gap(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *prev,
 			 struct bio *next)
 {
-	if (!bio_has_data(prev))
+	if (!bio_has_data(prev) || !queue_virt_boundary(q))
 		return false;
 
-	return bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &prev->bi_io_vec[prev->bi_vcnt - 1],
-				next->bi_io_vec[0].bv_offset);
+	return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &prev->bi_io_vec[prev->bi_vcnt - 1],
+				  next->bi_io_vec[0].bv_offset);
 }
 
 static inline bool req_gap_back_merge(struct request *req, struct bio *bio)


Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from ming.lei@canonical.com are

queue-4.4/block-bio-introduce-helpers-to-get-the-1st-and-last-bvec.patch
queue-4.4/block-check-virt-boundary-in-bio_will_gap.patch
queue-4.4/block-get-the-1st-and-last-bvec-via-helpers.patch