linux-kernel - Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH v2 2/7] dax: change bdev_dax_supported() to support boolean returns

Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Message-ID: <20180531222645.GA6086@magnolia>
Date:   Thu, 31 May 2018 15:26:45 -0700
From:   "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
To:     Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
Cc:     Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>,
        linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH v2 2/7] dax: change bdev_dax_supported() to
 support boolean returns

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 04:52:06PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Thu, May 31 2018 at  3:13pm -0400,
> Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@...cle.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:01:14PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:25:10PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 01:51:01PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > > > > From: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
> > > > > 
> > > > > The function return values are confusing with the way the function is
> > > > > named. We expect a true or false return value but it actually returns
> > > > > 0/-errno.  This makes the code very confusing. Changing the return values
> > > > > to return a bool where if DAX is supported then return true and no DAX
> > > > > support returns false.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Looks ok, do you want me to pull the first two patches through the xfs
> > > > tree?
> > > > 
> > > > Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
> > > 
> > > Thanks for the review.
> > > 
> > > I'm not sure what's best.  If you do that then Mike will need to have a DM
> > > branch for the rest of the series based on your stable commits, yea?
> > > 
> > > Mike what would you prefer?
> > 
> > I /was/ about to say that I would pull in the first two patches, but now
> > I can't get xfs to mount with pmem at all, and have no way of testing
> > this...?
> 
> Once you get this sorted out, please feel free to pull in the first 2.

Sorted.  It'll be in Friday's for-next.  Ross helped me bang on the pmem
devices w/ ndctl to enable fsdax mode and twist qemu until everything
worked properly. ;)

--D

> I'm unlikely to get to reviewing the DM patches in this series until
> tomorrow at the earliest.
> 
> Mike
> 
> --
> dm-devel mailing list
> dm-devel@...hat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel

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