Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] random: convert to using iters, for Al Viro

Jens Axboe
2022-05-20T16:41:34Z

On 5/20/22 10:39 AM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 10:24:36AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 5/20/22 10:15 AM, Al Viro wrote:
>>> IIRC, Linus' position at the time had been along the lines of
>>> "splice is not so good ABI anyway, so let's do it and fix up
>>> the places that do get real-world complaints once such appear".
>>> So /dev/urandom is one such place...
>>
>> That's what Christoph said too. Honestly that's a very odd way to
>> attempt to justify breakage like this, even if it is tempting to
>> facilitate the set_fs() removal. But then be honest about it and say
>> it like it is, rather than some hand wavy explanation that frankly
>> doesn't make any sense.
>>
>> The referenced change doesn't change the splice ABI at all, hence the
>> justification seems very random to me. It kept what we already have,
>> except we randomly break some use cases.
>
> It looks like Al is right in the sense that Linus must certainly be
> aware of the breakage. He fixed tty in 9bb48c82aced ("tty: implement
> write_iter").

I don't think anyone is disputing that, but I also know that Linus wants
these fixed up as they are discovered. And I agree with him on that,
even if I disagree on the process to get there as it introduced
frivolous breakage...

> Anyway, it seems like the iter functions are the way forward, so this v4
> is queued up now (with a few minor cosmetic changes) and pushed to:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/crng/random.git/log/
> I'll send an early 5.19 pull for everything either tonight or Sunday.
> And then next week I'll start on backports. (Though, 5.12 is a weird
> kernel version; I assume this is some Meta kernel that has its own
> backport team?)

Thanks!

> Meanwhile, hopefully Al can pick up the splice.c sendfile(2) chardev
> patch for 5.19, so at least there'll be some silver lining to the
> performance hit.

Let's hope so.

--
Jens Axboe