linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 09/11] dm-table: allow non po2 zoned devices

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: <65a336f0-ecd7-e9d5-2646-37cf9f157d53@opensource.wdc.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 Jul 2022 12:22:41 +0900
From:   Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>
To:     Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@...sung.com>, hch@....de, axboe@...nel.dk,
        snitzer@...nel.org, Johannes.Thumshirn@....com
Cc:     matias.bjorling@....com, gost.dev@...sung.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hare@...e.de,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, pankydev8@...il.com,
        bvanassche@....org, jaegeuk@...nel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
        linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 09/11] dm-table: allow non po2 zoned devices

On 7/28/22 01:22, Pankaj Raghav wrote:
> As the block layer now supports non po2 zoned devices, allow dm to
> support non po2 zoned device.

Please rephrase "non po2 zoned devices" here and in the title to correctly
refer to the zone size of zoned devices. Because "non po2 zoned devices"
means absolutely nothing. Let's be clear please.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@...sung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/md/dm-table.c | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-table.c b/drivers/md/dm-table.c
> index 332f96b58252..534fddfc2b42 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/dm-table.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/dm-table.c
> @@ -250,7 +250,7 @@ static int device_area_is_invalid(struct dm_target *ti, struct dm_dev *dev,
>  	if (bdev_is_zoned(bdev)) {
>  		unsigned int zone_sectors = bdev_zone_sectors(bdev);
>  
> -		if (start & (zone_sectors - 1)) {
> +		if (!bdev_is_zone_aligned(bdev, start)) {
>  			DMWARN("%s: start=%llu not aligned to h/w zone size %u of %pg",
>  			       dm_device_name(ti->table->md),
>  			       (unsigned long long)start,
> @@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ static int device_area_is_invalid(struct dm_target *ti, struct dm_dev *dev,
>  		 * devices do not end up with a smaller zone in the middle of
>  		 * the sector range.
>  		 */
> -		if (len & (zone_sectors - 1)) {
> +		if (!bdev_is_zone_aligned(bdev, len)) {
>  			DMWARN("%s: len=%llu not aligned to h/w zone size %u of %pg",
>  			       dm_device_name(ti->table->md),
>  			       (unsigned long long)len,
> @@ -1642,8 +1642,8 @@ static int validate_hardware_zoned_model(struct dm_table *t,
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
>  
> -	/* Check zone size validity and compatibility */
> -	if (!zone_sectors || !is_power_of_2(zone_sectors))
> +	/* Check zone size validity */

The comment is not super useful now given the trivial test.

> +	if (!zone_sectors)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
>  	if (dm_table_any_dev_attr(t, device_not_matches_zone_sectors, &zone_sectors)) {


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research