linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/6] block: Pass op_flags into blk_queue_get_max

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b0e1cd11-da05-3a84-9c64-14375f61515d@virtuozzo.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Jan 2020 13:08:59 +0300
From:   Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>
To:     Bob Liu <bob.liu@...cle.com>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
        axboe@...nel.dk, agk@...hat.com, snitzer@...hat.com,
        dm-devel@...hat.com, song@...nel.org, tytso@....edu,
        adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, Chaitanya.Kulkarni@....com,
        darrick.wong@...cle.com, ming.lei@...hat.com, osandov@...com,
        jthumshirn@...e.de, minwoo.im.dev@...il.com, damien.lemoal@....com,
        andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com, hare@...e.com, tj@...nel.org,
        ajay.joshi@....com, sagi@...mberg.me, dsterba@...e.com,
        bvanassche@....org, dhowells@...hat.com, asml.silence@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/6] block: Pass op_flags into
 blk_queue_get_max_sectors()

On 25.01.2020 05:37, Bob Liu wrote:
> On 1/22/20 6:58 PM, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
>> This preparation patch changes argument type, and now
>> the function takes full op_flags instead of just op code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>
>> ---
>>  block/blk-core.c       |    4 ++--
>>  include/linux/blkdev.h |    8 +++++---
>>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
>> index 50a5de025d5e..ac2634bcda1f 100644
>> --- a/block/blk-core.c
>> +++ b/block/blk-core.c
>> @@ -1250,10 +1250,10 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(submit_bio);
>>  static int blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q,
>>  				      struct request *rq)
>>  {
>> -	if (blk_rq_sectors(rq) > blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq))) {
>> +	if (blk_rq_sectors(rq) > blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, rq->cmd_flags)) {
>>  		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: over max size limit. (%u > %u)\n",
>>  			__func__, blk_rq_sectors(rq),
>> -			blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq)));
>> +			blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, rq->cmd_flags));
>>  		return -EIO;
>>  	}
>>  
>> diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
>> index 0f1127d0b043..23a5850f35f6 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
>> @@ -989,8 +989,10 @@ static inline struct bio_vec req_bvec(struct request *rq)
>>  }
>>  
>>  static inline unsigned int blk_queue_get_max_sectors(struct request_queue *q,
>> -						     int op)
>> +						     unsigned int op_flags)
>>  {
>> +	int op = op_flags & REQ_OP_MASK;
>> +
> 
> Nitpick. int op = req_op(rq);
> 
> Anyway, looks good to me.
> Reviewed-by: Bob Liu <bob.liu@...cle.com>

Thanks, Bob. I'll merge this nitpick and your "Reviewed-by" at next resend.
It will be after merge window is closed, and new patches are welcomed.

>>  	if (unlikely(op == REQ_OP_DISCARD || op == REQ_OP_SECURE_ERASE))
>>  		return min(q->limits.max_discard_sectors,
>>  			   UINT_MAX >> SECTOR_SHIFT);
>> @@ -1029,10 +1031,10 @@ static inline unsigned int blk_rq_get_max_sectors(struct request *rq,
>>  	if (!q->limits.chunk_sectors ||
>>  	    req_op(rq) == REQ_OP_DISCARD ||
>>  	    req_op(rq) == REQ_OP_SECURE_ERASE)
>> -		return blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq));
>> +		return blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, rq->cmd_flags);
>>  
>>  	return min(blk_max_size_offset(q, offset),
>> -			blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq)));
>> +			blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, rq->cmd_flags));
>>  }
>>  
>>  static inline unsigned int blk_rq_count_bios(struct request *rq)
>>
>>
>