linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/7] block: add queue_logical_block_mask() and bdev_logical_block

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]

Date:   Wed, 28 Jun 2023 21:34:36 -0700
From:   "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
To:     Yangtao Li <frank.li@...o.com>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, axboe@...nel.dk,
        song@...nel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org,
        xiang@...nel.org, chao@...nel.org, huyue2@...lpad.com,
        jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com, hch@...radead.org,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] block: add queue_logical_block_mask() and
 bdev_logical_block_mask()

On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 11:44:35AM +0800, Yangtao Li wrote:
> On 2023/6/29 0:46, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 05:34:54PM +0800, Yangtao Li wrote:
> > > Introduce queue_logical_block_mask() and bdev_logical_block_mask()
> > > to simplify code, which replace (queue_logical_block_size(q) - 1)
> > > and (bdev_logical_block_size(bdev) - 1).
> > The thing is that I know what queue_logical_block_size - 1 does.
> > That's the low bits.  _Which_ bits are queue_logical_block_mask?
> > The high bits or the low bits?  And before you say "It's obviously",
> > we have both ways round in the kernel today.
> 
> 
> I guess for this you mentioned, can we name it bdev_logical_block_lmask and
> queue_logical_block_lmask?

{bdev,queue}_offset_in_lba() ?

--D

> 
> Thx,
> 
> > 
> > I am not in favour of this change.  I might be in favour of bool
> > queue_logical_block_aligned(q, x), but even then it doesn't seem worth
> > the bits.