[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211124063605.GA6889@lst.de>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 07:36:05 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>, dm-devel@...hat.com,
linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/29] dax: move the partition alignment check into
fs_dax_get_by_bdev
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 02:25:55PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > + if ((get_start_sect(bdev) * SECTOR_SIZE) % PAGE_SIZE ||
> > + (bdev_nr_sectors(bdev) * SECTOR_SIZE) % PAGE_SIZE) {
>
> Do we have to be careful about 64-bit division here, or do we not
> support DAX on 32-bit?
I can't find anything in the Kconfig limiting DAX to 32-bit. But
then again the existing code has divisions like this, so the compiler
is probably smart enough to turn them into shifts.
> > + pr_info("%pg: error: unaligned partition for dax\n", bdev);
>
> I also wonder if this should be ratelimited...?
This happens once (or maybe three times for XFS with rt and log devices)
at mount time, so I see no need for a ratelimit.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists