[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YXFO8uCgIDoIqTgC@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2021 04:28:50 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Jane Chu <jane.chu@...cle.com>
Cc: david@...morbit.com, djwong@...nel.org, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
hch@...radead.org, vishal.l.verma@...el.com, dave.jiang@...el.com,
agk@...hat.com, snitzer@...hat.com, dm-devel@...hat.com,
ira.weiny@...el.com, willy@...radead.org, vgoyal@...hat.com,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] dax,pmem: Add data recovery feature to
pmem_copy_to/from_iter()
> + if (flags & DAXDEV_F_RECOVERY) {
> + lead_off = (unsigned long)addr & ~PAGE_MASK;
> + len = PFN_PHYS(PFN_UP(lead_off + bytes));
> + if (is_bad_pmem(&pmem->bb, PFN_PHYS(pgoff) / 512, len)) {
> + if (lead_off || !(PAGE_ALIGNED(bytes))) {
> + dev_warn(dev, "Found poison, but addr(%p) and/or bytes(%#lx) not page aligned\n",
> + addr, bytes);
> + return (size_t) -EIO;
> + }
> + pmem_off = PFN_PHYS(pgoff) + pmem->data_offset;
> + if (pmem_clear_poison(pmem, pmem_off, bytes) !=
> + BLK_STS_OK)
> + return (size_t) -EIO;
> + }
Shouldn't this just go down in a separe ->clear_poison operation
to make the whole thing a little easier to follow?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists