[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZMjYYtXgzn86UIF8@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2023 03:03:14 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Jinyoung Choi <j-young.choi@...sung.com>
Cc: "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"kbusch@...nel.org" <kbusch@...nel.org>,
"chaitanya.kulkarni@....com" <chaitanya.kulkarni@....com>,
"sagi@...mberg.me" <sagi@...mberg.me>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] bio-integrity: cleanup adding integrity pages to
bip's bvec
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 09:54:59PM +0900, Jinyoung Choi wrote:
> The bio_integrity_add_page() returns the set length if the execution
> result is successful. Otherwise, return 0.
>
> Unnecessary if statement was removed. And when the result value was less
> than the set value, it was changed to failed.
Maybe word this as
bio_integrity_add_page() returns the add length if successful, else 0,
just as bio_add_page. Simply check return value checking in
bio_integrity_prep to not deal with a > 0 but < len case that can't
happen.
Otherwise looks good:
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists