linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 15/23] md/md-llbitmap: implement llbitmap IO

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: <6eea2fad-f405-ed20-73f3-c26542b401bf@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 16:55:32 +0800
From: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
Cc: xni@...hat.com, colyli@...nel.org, song@...nel.org,
 linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com, yangerkun@...wei.com,
 johnny.chenyi@...wei.com, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/23] md/md-llbitmap: implement llbitmap IO

Hi,

在 2025/05/27 16:27, Christoph Hellwig 写道:
> FYI, I still find splitting the additioon of the new md-llbitmap.c into
> multiple patches not helpful for reviewing it.  I'm mostly reviewing
> the applied code and hope I didn't forget to place anything into the
> right mail.
> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/md/md-llbitmap.c b/drivers/md/md-llbitmap.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..1a01b6777527
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/md/md-llbitmap.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,571 @@
>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_MD_LLBITMAP
> 
> Please don't ifdef the entire code in a sourc file, instead just compile
> it conditionally:
> 
> 
> md-mod-y        += md.o md-bitmap.o
> md-mod-$(CONFIG_MD_LLBITMAP) += md-llbitmap.o
> 

Thanks for the suggestion, this is indeed better.

>> +	BitNeedSync,
>> +	/* data is synchronizing */
>> +	BitSyncing,
>> +	nr_llbitmap_state,
> 
> Any reason nr_llbitmap_state, doesn't follow the naming scheme of the other
> bits,?

I'm following the enum name(enum llbitmap_state) here, because this is
the number to total bits, not a meaningful bit.

Do you prefer a name like BitStateCount?

Thanks,
Kuai

> 
>> +	BitmapActionStale,
>> +	nr_llbitmap_action,
> 
> Same here?
> 
>> +			if (rdev->raid_disk < 0 || test_bit(Faulty, &rdev->flags))
> 
> Overly long line.
> .
>