From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 738ECC433E6 for ; Sun, 14 Feb 2021 21:19:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4764B64E4E for ; Sun, 14 Feb 2021 21:19:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230077AbhBNVTI (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Feb 2021 16:19:08 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60052 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229960AbhBNVTE (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Feb 2021 16:19:04 -0500 Received: from zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk (zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk [IPv6:2607:5300:60:148a::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 404C7C061574; Sun, 14 Feb 2021 13:18:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from viro by zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lBOmQ-00E13n-Po; Sun, 14 Feb 2021 21:18:10 +0000 Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2021 21:18:10 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel Subject: Re: [git pull] sendfile fixes Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: Al Viro Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 11:35:36AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Just to clarify: this says "fixes", but I get the feeling that you > meant for me to pull tomorrow in the 5.12 merge window? > > I like the patches, but they don't seem to be anything hugely urgent. > They should make "sendfile to pipe" more efficient, but the current > hack is _workable_ (and not any worse than what we historically did) > even if it's not optimal. > > Right? Yes. It allows to drop the current hack, but it's not urgent. > Oh, and it looks like the first line of the commit message of > 313d64a35d36 ("do_splice_to(): move the logics for limiting the read > length in") got truncated somehow.. Offense against style, actually - preposition torn from object and moved to the very end of sentence... "[splice] move the logics for limiting the read length into do_splice_to()" would probably be better.