| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <2d00b70a-a947-9ded-76b3-c954432bdb06@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 19:49:17 +0800
From: Li Nan <linan666@...weicloud.com>
To: Xiao Ni <xni@...hat.com>, linan666@...weicloud.com
Cc: song@...nel.org, yukuai@...as.com, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yangerkun@...wei.com, yi.zhang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/15] md: use folio for bb_folio
在 2026/1/19 11:03, Xiao Ni 写道:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 8:11 PM <linan666@...weicloud.com> wrote:
>>
>> From: Li Nan <linan122@...wei.com>
>>
>> Convert bio_page to bio_folio and use it throughout.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Li Nan <linan122@...wei.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/md/md.h | 3 ++-
>> drivers/md/md.c | 25 +++++++++++++------------
>> 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/md/md.h b/drivers/md/md.h
>> index 410f8a6b75e7..aa6d9df50fd0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/md/md.h
>> +++ b/drivers/md/md.h
>> @@ -144,7 +144,8 @@ struct md_rdev {
>> struct block_device *bdev; /* block device handle */
>> struct file *bdev_file; /* Handle from open for bdev */
>>
>> - struct page *sb_page, *bb_page;
>> + struct page *sb_page;
>> + struct folio *bb_folio;
>> int sb_loaded;
>> __u64 sb_events;
>> sector_t data_offset; /* start of data in array */
>> diff --git a/drivers/md/md.c b/drivers/md/md.c
>> index 9dfd6f8da5b8..0732bbcdb95d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/md/md.c
>> +++ b/drivers/md/md.c
>> @@ -1073,9 +1073,9 @@ void md_rdev_clear(struct md_rdev *rdev)
>> rdev->sb_start = 0;
>> rdev->sectors = 0;
>> }
>> - if (rdev->bb_page) {
>> - put_page(rdev->bb_page);
>> - rdev->bb_page = NULL;
>> + if (rdev->bb_folio) {
>> + folio_put(rdev->bb_folio);
>> + rdev->bb_folio = NULL;
>> }
>> badblocks_exit(&rdev->badblocks);
>> }
>> @@ -1909,9 +1909,10 @@ static int super_1_load(struct md_rdev *rdev, struct md_rdev *refdev, int minor_
>>
>> rdev->desc_nr = le32_to_cpu(sb->dev_number);
>>
>> - if (!rdev->bb_page) {
>> - rdev->bb_page = alloc_page(GFP_KERNEL);
>> - if (!rdev->bb_page)
>> + if (!rdev->bb_folio) {
>> + rdev->bb_folio = folio_alloc(GFP_KERNEL, 0);
>> +
>> + if (!rdev->bb_folio)
>> return -ENOMEM;
>> }
>> if ((le32_to_cpu(sb->feature_map) & MD_FEATURE_BAD_BLOCKS) &&
>> @@ -1930,10 +1931,10 @@ static int super_1_load(struct md_rdev *rdev, struct md_rdev *refdev, int minor_
>> if (offset == 0)
>> return -EINVAL;
>> bb_sector = (long long)offset;
>> - if (!sync_page_io(rdev, bb_sector, sectors << 9,
>> - rdev->bb_page, REQ_OP_READ, true))
>> + if (!sync_folio_io(rdev, bb_sector, sectors << 9, 0,
>> + rdev->bb_folio, REQ_OP_READ, true))
>> return -EIO;
>> - bbp = (__le64 *)page_address(rdev->bb_page);
>> + bbp = (__le64 *)folio_address(rdev->bb_folio);
>> rdev->badblocks.shift = sb->bblog_shift;
>> for (i = 0 ; i < (sectors << (9-3)) ; i++, bbp++) {
>> u64 bb = le64_to_cpu(*bbp);
>> @@ -2300,7 +2301,7 @@ static void super_1_sync(struct mddev *mddev, struct md_rdev *rdev)
>> md_error(mddev, rdev);
>> else {
>> struct badblocks *bb = &rdev->badblocks;
>> - __le64 *bbp = (__le64 *)page_address(rdev->bb_page);
>> + __le64 *bbp = (__le64 *)folio_address(rdev->bb_folio);
>> u64 *p = bb->page;
>> sb->feature_map |= cpu_to_le32(MD_FEATURE_BAD_BLOCKS);
>> if (bb->changed) {
>> @@ -2953,7 +2954,7 @@ void md_update_sb(struct mddev *mddev, int force_change)
>> md_write_metadata(mddev, rdev,
>> rdev->badblocks.sector,
>> rdev->badblocks.size << 9,
>> - rdev->bb_page, 0);
>> + folio_page(rdev->bb_folio, 0), 0);
>> rdev->badblocks.size = 0;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -3809,7 +3810,7 @@ int md_rdev_init(struct md_rdev *rdev)
>> rdev->sb_events = 0;
>> rdev->last_read_error = 0;
>> rdev->sb_loaded = 0;
>> - rdev->bb_page = NULL;
>> + rdev->bb_folio = NULL;
>> atomic_set(&rdev->nr_pending, 0);
>> atomic_set(&rdev->read_errors, 0);
>> atomic_set(&rdev->corrected_errors, 0);
>> --
>> 2.39.2
>>
>
> Hi Nan
>
> Bad block page is only one single page. I don't think it's necessary
> to use folio here. And it uses folio_page to get the page again. Or do
> you plan to replace all page apis to folio apis? Looking through all
> patches, sync_page_io is not removed. In patch02, it says sync_page_io
> will be removed. So maybe it's better to switch bb_page to bb_folio in
> your second patch set? And this patch set only focuses on replacing
> sync pages with folio. It's my 2 cents point. If you think it's better
> to change the bad block page here, I'm still ok.
>
> Best Regards
> Xiao
>
Hi Xiao,
Thanks for your review. Move it to next patch set is fine. I will delete
this patch in v2.
--
Thanks,
Nan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists