linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm/block: convert rw

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a49706b7-848f-d558-c253-2b5c4a75a30f@kernel.dk>
Date:	Thu, 4 Aug 2016 14:15:08 -0600
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Mike Christie <mchristi@...hat.com>,
	kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Cc:	kbuild-all@...org, ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, david@...morbit.com,
	minchan@...nel.org, ngupta@...are.org, vishal.l.verma@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm/block: convert rw_page users to bio op use

On 08/04/2016 01:59 PM, Mike Christie wrote:
> On 08/04/2016 02:27 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 08/04/2016 11:50 AM, kbuild test robot wrote:
>>> Hi Mike,
>>>
>>> [auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
>>> [also build test ERROR on next-20160804]
>>> [cannot apply to v4.7]
>>> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note
>>> to help improve the system]
>>>
>>> url:
>>> https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Mike-Christie/mm-block-convert-rw_page-users-to-bio-op-use/20160805-012041
>>>
>>> config: i386-tinyconfig (attached as .config)
>>> compiler: gcc-6 (Debian 6.1.1-9) 6.1.1 20160705
>>> reproduce:
>>>         # save the attached .config to linux build tree
>>>         make ARCH=i386
>>>
>>> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>>>
>>>    mm/filemap.c: In function 'page_endio':
>>>>> mm/filemap.c:892:7: error: implicit declaration of function
>>>>> 'op_is_write' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>      if (!op_is_write(op)) {
>>>           ^~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> Mike, how about moving op_is_write() outside of CONFIG_BLOCK protection
>> in fs.h, and making the REQ_OP_* enum generally available as well? That
>> should fix it.
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/blk_types.h b/include/linux/blk_types.h
>> index f254eb264924..14b28ff2caf8 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/blk_types.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/blk_types.h
>> @@ -18,6 +18,17 @@ struct cgroup_subsys_state;
>>  typedef void (bio_end_io_t) (struct bio *);
>>  typedef void (bio_destructor_t) (struct bio *);
>>
>> +enum req_op {
>> +    REQ_OP_READ,
>> +    REQ_OP_WRITE,
>> +    REQ_OP_DISCARD,        /* request to discard sectors */
>> +    REQ_OP_SECURE_ERASE,    /* request to securely erase sectors */
>> +    REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME,    /* write same block many times */
>> +    REQ_OP_FLUSH,        /* request for cache flush */
>> +};
>> +
>> +#define REQ_OP_BITS 3
>> +
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_BLOCK
>>  /*
>>   * main unit of I/O for the block layer and lower layers (ie drivers and
>> @@ -228,17 +239,6 @@ enum rq_flag_bits {
>>  #define REQ_HASHED        (1ULL << __REQ_HASHED)
>>  #define REQ_MQ_INFLIGHT        (1ULL << __REQ_MQ_INFLIGHT)
>>
>> -enum req_op {
>> -    REQ_OP_READ,
>> -    REQ_OP_WRITE,
>> -    REQ_OP_DISCARD,        /* request to discard sectors */
>> -    REQ_OP_SECURE_ERASE,    /* request to securely erase sectors */
>> -    REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME,    /* write same block many times */
>> -    REQ_OP_FLUSH,        /* request for cache flush */
>> -};
>> -
>> -#define REQ_OP_BITS 3
>> -
>>  typedef unsigned int blk_qc_t;
>>  #define BLK_QC_T_NONE    -1U
>>  #define BLK_QC_T_SHIFT    16
>> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
>> index f2a69f20926f..13cc1bfce9aa 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
>> @@ -2465,12 +2465,13 @@ extern void init_special_inode(struct inode *,
>> umode_t, dev_t);
>>  extern void make_bad_inode(struct inode *);
>>  extern bool is_bad_inode(struct inode *);
>>
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_BLOCK
>>  static inline bool op_is_write(unsigned int op)
>>  {
>>      return op == REQ_OP_READ ? false : true;
>>  }
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_BLOCK
>> +
>>  /*
>>   * return data direction, READ or WRITE
>>   */
>>
>
>
> Looks ok to me. Did a quick build and test run with it.

Is anyone using the op_flags in the ->rw_page() strategy?

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html