linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 09/11] xfs: remove the fork fields in the writepage

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]

Date:   Tue, 8 Oct 2019 08:59:44 +1100
From:   Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     "Darrick J . Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@....com>,
        Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>,
        linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] xfs: remove the fork fields in the writepage_ctx
 and ioend

On Sun, Oct 06, 2019 at 05:46:06PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> In preparation for moving the writeback code to iomap.c, replace the
> XFS-specific COW fork concept with the iomap IOMAP_F_SHARED flag.

"In preparation for switching XFS to use the fs/iomap writeback
code..."?

I suspect the IOMAP_F_SHARED hunk I pointed out in the previous
patch should be in this one...

> 
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
> Reviewed-by: Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@...hat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
> ---
>  fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>  fs/xfs/xfs_aops.h |  2 +-
>  2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c
> index 9f22885902ef..8c101081e3b1 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c
> @@ -23,7 +23,6 @@
>   */
>  struct xfs_writepage_ctx {
>  	struct iomap		iomap;
> -	int			fork;
>  	unsigned int		data_seq;
>  	unsigned int		cow_seq;
>  	struct xfs_ioend	*ioend;
> @@ -257,7 +256,7 @@ xfs_end_ioend(
>  	 */
>  	error = blk_status_to_errno(ioend->io_bio->bi_status);
>  	if (unlikely(error)) {
> -		if (ioend->io_fork == XFS_COW_FORK)
> +		if (ioend->io_flags & IOMAP_F_SHARED)
>  			xfs_reflink_cancel_cow_range(ip, offset, size, true);
>  		goto done;
>  	}
> @@ -265,7 +264,7 @@ xfs_end_ioend(
>  	/*
>  	 * Success: commit the COW or unwritten blocks if needed.
>  	 */
> -	if (ioend->io_fork == XFS_COW_FORK)
> +	if (ioend->io_flags & IOMAP_F_SHARED)
>  		error = xfs_reflink_end_cow(ip, offset, size);
>  	else if (ioend->io_type == IOMAP_UNWRITTEN)
>  		error = xfs_iomap_write_unwritten(ip, offset, size, false);
> @@ -298,7 +297,8 @@ xfs_ioend_can_merge(
>  {
>  	if (ioend->io_bio->bi_status != next->io_bio->bi_status)
>  		return false;
> -	if ((ioend->io_fork == XFS_COW_FORK) ^ (next->io_fork == XFS_COW_FORK))
> +	if ((ioend->io_flags & IOMAP_F_SHARED) ^
> +	    (next->io_flags & IOMAP_F_SHARED))
>  		return false;
>  	if ((ioend->io_type == IOMAP_UNWRITTEN) ^
>  	    (next->io_type == IOMAP_UNWRITTEN))

These probably should be indented too, as they are continuations,
not separate logic statements.

> @@ -768,7 +769,8 @@ xfs_add_to_ioend(
>  	bool			merged, same_page = false;
>  
>  	if (!wpc->ioend ||
> -	    wpc->fork != wpc->ioend->io_fork ||
> +	    (wpc->iomap.flags & IOMAP_F_SHARED) !=
> +	    (wpc->ioend->io_flags & IOMAP_F_SHARED) ||

Same here.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com