linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/12] badblocks: factor out a helper try_adjacent

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: <i5vkxswklce2wtn3aolrd6qrtlib3obtlzgmdix22afcurp7lz@jkxbieqcitx4>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 18:04:43 +0800
From: Coly Li <i@...y.li>
To: Zheng Qixing <zhengqixing@...weicloud.com>
Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, song@...nel.org, colyli@...nel.org, 
	yukuai3@...wei.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com, vishal.l.verma@...el.com, 
	dave.jiang@...el.com, ira.weiny@...el.com, dlemoal@...nel.org, yanjun.zhu@...ux.dev, 
	kch@...dia.com, hare@...e.de, zhengqixing@...wei.com, john.g.garry@...cle.com, 
	geliang@...nel.org, xni@...hat.com, colyli@...e.de, linux-block@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev, 
	yi.zhang@...wei.com, yangerkun@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/12] badblocks: factor out a helper try_adjacent_combine

On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 04:10:59PM +0800, Zheng Qixing wrote:
> From: Li Nan <linan122@...wei.com>
> 
> Factor out try_adjacent_combine(), and it will be used in the later patch.
>

Which patch is try_adjacent_combine() used in? I don't see that at a quick glance.

Thanks.

Coly Li

 
> Signed-off-by: Li Nan <linan122@...wei.com>
> ---
>  block/badblocks.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block/badblocks.c b/block/badblocks.c
> index bcee057efc47..f069c93e986d 100644
> --- a/block/badblocks.c
> +++ b/block/badblocks.c
> @@ -855,6 +855,31 @@ static void badblocks_update_acked(struct badblocks *bb)
>  		bb->unacked_exist = 0;
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * Return 'true' if the range indicated by 'bad' is exactly backward
> + * overlapped with the bad range (from bad table) indexed by 'behind'.
> + */
> +static bool try_adjacent_combine(struct badblocks *bb, int prev)
> +{
> +	u64 *p = bb->page;
> +
> +	if (prev >= 0 && (prev + 1) < bb->count &&
> +	    BB_END(p[prev]) == BB_OFFSET(p[prev + 1]) &&
> +	    (BB_LEN(p[prev]) + BB_LEN(p[prev + 1])) <= BB_MAX_LEN &&
> +	    BB_ACK(p[prev]) == BB_ACK(p[prev + 1])) {
> +		p[prev] = BB_MAKE(BB_OFFSET(p[prev]),
> +				  BB_LEN(p[prev]) + BB_LEN(p[prev + 1]),
> +				  BB_ACK(p[prev]));
> +
> +		if ((prev + 2) < bb->count)
> +			memmove(p + prev + 1, p + prev + 2,
> +				(bb->count -  (prev + 2)) * 8);
> +		bb->count--;
> +		return true;
> +	}
> +	return false;
> +}
> +
>  /* Do exact work to set bad block range into the bad block table */
>  static int _badblocks_set(struct badblocks *bb, sector_t s, int sectors,
>  			  int acknowledged)
> @@ -1022,20 +1047,7 @@ static int _badblocks_set(struct badblocks *bb, sector_t s, int sectors,
>  	 * merged. (prev < 0) condition is not handled here,
>  	 * because it's already complicated enough.
>  	 */
> -	if (prev >= 0 &&
> -	    (prev + 1) < bb->count &&
> -	    BB_END(p[prev]) == BB_OFFSET(p[prev + 1]) &&
> -	    (BB_LEN(p[prev]) + BB_LEN(p[prev + 1])) <= BB_MAX_LEN &&
> -	    BB_ACK(p[prev]) == BB_ACK(p[prev + 1])) {
> -		p[prev] = BB_MAKE(BB_OFFSET(p[prev]),
> -				  BB_LEN(p[prev]) + BB_LEN(p[prev + 1]),
> -				  BB_ACK(p[prev]));
> -
> -		if ((prev + 2) < bb->count)
> -			memmove(p + prev + 1, p + prev + 2,
> -				(bb->count -  (prev + 2)) * 8);
> -		bb->count--;
> -	}
> +	try_adjacent_combine(bb, prev);
>  
>  	if (space_desired && !badblocks_full(bb)) {
>  		s = orig_start;
> -- 
> 2.39.2
> 

-- 
Coly Li