Re: [PATCH v8 03/13] block: add dma-buf support for raw bdev

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] vfs: build failure due to missing init_dma_buf_io_ctx and iov_iter_is_dmabuf_map definitions
--

commit d99a726724959c24584b1b7d60b6cbfd1f565d00
Author: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>

block: add dma-buf support for raw bdev

This commit adds a proxy implementation of init_dma_buf_io_ctx() that forwards
the call to a new block_device_operations operation. It also rejects dma-buf
backed iterators for buffered IO.

> diff --git a/block/fops.c b/block/fops.c
> index 40a8ceeec1940..79aee87c66010 100644
> --- a/block/fops.c
> +++ b/block/fops.c
> @@ -731,6 +731,9 @@ blkdev_direct_write(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from)
>  
>  static ssize_t blkdev_buffered_write(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from)
>  {
> +	if (unlikely(iov_iter_is_dmabuf_map(from)))

[Severity: Low]
Is this regression caused by a missing prerequisite patch? The function
iov_iter_is_dmabuf_map() appears to be undeclared in the kernel headers,
which results in an implicit declaration error during the build.

> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
>  	return iomap_file_buffered_write(iocb, from, &blkdev_iomap_ops, NULL,
>  			NULL);
>  }

[ ... ]

> @@ -977,6 +998,7 @@ const struct file_operations def_blk_fops = {
>  	.fallocate	= blkdev_fallocate,
>  	.uring_cmd	= blkdev_uring_cmd,
>  	.fop_flags	= FOP_BUFFER_RASYNC | FOP_DONTCACHE,
> +	.init_dma_buf_io_ctx = blkdev_init_dma_buf_io_ctx,

[Severity: Low]
Does struct file_operations include init_dma_buf_io_ctx in this tree? It
seems this member does not exist, which causes a build regression due to
the initialization of a non-existent member.

>  };
>  
>  static __init int blkdev_init(void)

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/cover.1791336002.git.asml.silence@gmail.com?part=3