linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 8/9] xfs: Implement ->notify

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]

Message-ID: <Ybi+HYoI2i3dVToz@infradead.org>
Date:   Tue, 14 Dec 2021 07:54:05 -0800
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@...itsu.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
        nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, djwong@...nel.org,
        dan.j.williams@...el.com, david@...morbit.com, hch@...radead.org,
        jane.chu@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 8/9] xfs: Implement ->notify_failure() for XFS

> +		// TODO check and try to fix metadata

Please avoid //-style comments.

> +static u64
> +xfs_dax_ddev_offset(
> +	struct xfs_mount	*mp,
> +	struct dax_device	*dax_dev,
> +	u64			disk_offset)
> +{
> +	xfs_buftarg_t *targp;
> +
> +	if (mp->m_ddev_targp->bt_daxdev == dax_dev)
> +		targp = mp->m_ddev_targp;
> +	else if (mp->m_logdev_targp->bt_daxdev == dax_dev)
> +		targp = mp->m_logdev_targp;
> +	else
> +		targp = mp->m_rtdev_targp;
> +
> +	return disk_offset - targp->bt_dax_part_off;

This is only called for the data device.  So I think we can simplify
this and open code the logic in xfs_dax_notify_ddev_failure.


> +void
> +xfs_notify_failure_register(
> +	struct xfs_mount	*mp,
> +	struct dax_device	*dax_dev)
> +{
> +	if (dax_dev && !fs_dax_get_holder(dax_dev))
> +		fs_dax_register_holder(dax_dev, mp, &xfs_dax_holder_operations);
> +}
> +
> +void
> +xfs_notify_failure_unregister(
> +	struct dax_device	*dax_dev)
> +{
> +	if (dax_dev)
> +		fs_dax_unregister_holder(dax_dev);
> +}

Why do we need these wrappers?  Also instead of the fs_dax_get_holder
here, fs_dax_register_holder needs to return an error if there already
is a holder.