[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bc8cf710-c0ad-24e8-7849-6282c8e3bcff@acm.org>
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2022 20:33:22 -0700
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Dawei Li <set_pte_at@...look.com>
Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, hch@....de, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] block: simplify blksize_bits() implementation
On 10/29/22 20:25, Dawei Li wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 29, 2022 at 08:00:58PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On 10/29/22 19:17, Dawei Li wrote:
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
>>> index 57ed49f20d2e..7b537afe8b38 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
>>> @@ -1349,12 +1349,7 @@ static inline int blk_rq_aligned(struct request_queue *q, unsigned long addr,
>>> /* assumes size > 256 */
>>> static inline unsigned int blksize_bits(unsigned int size)
>>> {
>>> - unsigned int bits = 8;
>>> - do {
>>> - bits++;
>>> - size >>= 1;
>>> - } while (size > 256);
>>> - return bits;
>>> + return order_base_2((size + SECTOR_SIZE - 1) >> SECTOR_SHIFT) + SECTOR_SHIFT;
>>> }
>>
>> Why the rounding ("+ SECTOR_SIZE - 1")? The blksize_bits() argument should
>> be an argument of two.
>
> Yeah, that's what's supposed to be.
> But I thought maybe a "just in case" is more robust?
> Should we consider these corner cases(!is_power_of_2())?
I don't think that the Linux kernel supports block sizes that are not a
power of two. Hence my request to leave out the rounding code. Keeping
that code would be misleading because it would suggest that the
blksize_bits() argument can be something else than a power of two.
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists