linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 7/8] 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAPcyv4jO+-JkRcwZk0ZuYaGy0NDx2iZg-GjnDLWqVFYvciFF4g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 7 Apr 2022 23:26:08 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@...itsu.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux NVDIMM <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>, david <david@...morbit.com>,
        Jane Chu <jane.chu@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 7/8] xfs: Implement ->notify_failure() for XFS

On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 11:05 PM Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@...itsu.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> 在 2022/3/30 14:00, Christoph Hellwig 写道:
> >> @@ -1892,6 +1893,8 @@ xfs_free_buftarg(
> >>      list_lru_destroy(&btp->bt_lru);
> >>
> >>      blkdev_issue_flush(btp->bt_bdev);
> >> +    if (btp->bt_daxdev)
> >> +            dax_unregister_holder(btp->bt_daxdev, btp->bt_mount);
> >>      fs_put_dax(btp->bt_daxdev);
> >>
> >>      kmem_free(btp);
> >> @@ -1939,6 +1942,7 @@ xfs_alloc_buftarg(
> >>      struct block_device     *bdev)
> >>   {
> >>      xfs_buftarg_t           *btp;
> >> +    int                     error;
> >>
> >>      btp = kmem_zalloc(sizeof(*btp), KM_NOFS);
> >>
> >> @@ -1946,6 +1950,14 @@ xfs_alloc_buftarg(
> >>      btp->bt_dev =  bdev->bd_dev;
> >>      btp->bt_bdev = bdev;
> >>      btp->bt_daxdev = fs_dax_get_by_bdev(bdev, &btp->bt_dax_part_off);
> >> +    if (btp->bt_daxdev) {
> >> +            error = dax_register_holder(btp->bt_daxdev, mp,
> >> +                            &xfs_dax_holder_operations);
> >> +            if (error) {
> >> +                    xfs_err(mp, "DAX device already in use?!");
> >> +                    goto error_free;
> >> +            }
> >> +    }
> >
> > It seems to me that just passing the holder and holder ops to
> > fs_dax_get_by_bdev and the holder to dax_unregister_holder would
> > significantly simply the interface here.
> >
> > Dan, what do you think?
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> Could you give some advise on this API?  Is it needed to move
> dax_register_holder's job into fs_dax_get_by_bdev()?


Yes, works for me to just add them as optional arguments.