From fc02f33787d8dd227b54f263eba983d5b249c032 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Al Viro Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2022 19:16:56 -0400 Subject: [xen] fix "direction" argument of iov_iter_kvec() Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/xen') diff --git a/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c b/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c index d6f945fd4147..21b9c850a382 100644 --- a/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c +++ b/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c @@ -129,13 +129,13 @@ static bool pvcalls_conn_back_read(void *opaque) if (masked_prod < masked_cons) { vec[0].iov_base = data->in + masked_prod; vec[0].iov_len = wanted; - iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, WRITE, vec, 1, wanted); + iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, READ, vec, 1, wanted); } else { vec[0].iov_base = data->in + masked_prod; vec[0].iov_len = array_size - masked_prod; vec[1].iov_base = data->in; vec[1].iov_len = wanted - vec[0].iov_len; - iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, WRITE, vec, 2, wanted); + iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, READ, vec, 2, wanted); } atomic_set(&map->read, 0); @@ -188,13 +188,13 @@ static bool pvcalls_conn_back_write(struct sock_mapping *map) if (pvcalls_mask(prod, array_size) > pvcalls_mask(cons, array_size)) { vec[0].iov_base = data->out + pvcalls_mask(cons, array_size); vec[0].iov_len = size; - iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, READ, vec, 1, size); + iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, WRITE, vec, 1, size); } else { vec[0].iov_base = data->out + pvcalls_mask(cons, array_size); vec[0].iov_len = array_size - pvcalls_mask(cons, array_size); vec[1].iov_base = data->out; vec[1].iov_len = size - vec[0].iov_len; - iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, READ, vec, 2, size); + iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, WRITE, vec, 2, size); } atomic_set(&map->write, 0); -- cgit v1.2.3 From de4eda9de2d957ef2d6a8365a01e26a435e958cb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Al Viro Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2022 20:25:47 -0400 Subject: use less confusing names for iov_iter direction initializers READ/WRITE proved to be actively confusing - the meanings are "data destination, as used with read(2)" and "data source, as used with write(2)", but people keep interpreting those as "we read data from it" and "we write data to it", i.e. exactly the wrong way. Call them ITER_DEST and ITER_SOURCE - at least that is harder to misinterpret... Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/xen') diff --git a/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c b/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c index 21b9c850a382..28b2a1fa25ab 100644 --- a/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c +++ b/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c @@ -129,13 +129,13 @@ static bool pvcalls_conn_back_read(void *opaque) if (masked_prod < masked_cons) { vec[0].iov_base = data->in + masked_prod; vec[0].iov_len = wanted; - iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, READ, vec, 1, wanted); + iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, ITER_DEST, vec, 1, wanted); } else { vec[0].iov_base = data->in + masked_prod; vec[0].iov_len = array_size - masked_prod; vec[1].iov_base = data->in; vec[1].iov_len = wanted - vec[0].iov_len; - iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, READ, vec, 2, wanted); + iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, ITER_DEST, vec, 2, wanted); } atomic_set(&map->read, 0); @@ -188,13 +188,13 @@ static bool pvcalls_conn_back_write(struct sock_mapping *map) if (pvcalls_mask(prod, array_size) > pvcalls_mask(cons, array_size)) { vec[0].iov_base = data->out + pvcalls_mask(cons, array_size); vec[0].iov_len = size; - iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, WRITE, vec, 1, size); + iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, ITER_SOURCE, vec, 1, size); } else { vec[0].iov_base = data->out + pvcalls_mask(cons, array_size); vec[0].iov_len = array_size - pvcalls_mask(cons, array_size); vec[1].iov_base = data->out; vec[1].iov_len = size - vec[0].iov_len; - iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, WRITE, vec, 2, size); + iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, ITER_SOURCE, vec, 2, size); } atomic_set(&map->write, 0); -- cgit v1.2.3