[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090515171645.7a92d46c.zaitcev@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 17:16:45 -0600
From: Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@...hat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
IDE/ATA development list <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>,
Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@...glemail.com>,
Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>,
Eric Moore <Eric.Moore@....com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...ibm.com>, zaitcev@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH block#for-2.6.31 2/3] block: set rq->resid_len to
blk_rq_bytes() on issue
On Sat, 16 May 2009 07:14:44 +0900, Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com> wrote:
> So, I could have written
>
> if (cmd->act_len >= rq->resid_len)
> rq->resid_len = 0;
> else
> rq->resid_len -= cmd->act_len
>
> Instead I wrote
>
> rq->resid_len -= min(cmd->act_len, rq->resid_len);
>
> It's just capping the amount to be subtracted so that resid_len
> doesn't underflow. What is so wrong or bad style about that?
Curse of the gifted, I guess. To use a subtraction instead of zero
this way looks like a pointless, even mischievous obfuscation to me.
Also, we probably want a stack_dump or a printk when actual length
exceeds the requested length, don't we? If it ever happens, we
might be overwriting some I/O buffer somewhere.
-- Pete
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists