Prev: atang tree: make SATA Asynchronous Notification work
Next: relay: move remove_buf_file inside relay_close_buf
From: Jens Axboe on 28 Feb 2010 13:50
On Sat, Feb 27 2010, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> merge_bvec_fn() returns bvec->bv_len on success. So we have to check
> against this value. But in case of fs_optimization merge we compare
> with wrong value. This patch must be included in
> b428cd6da7e6559aca69aa2e3a526037d3f20403
> But accidentally i've forgot to add this in the initial patch.
> To make things straight let's replace all such checks.
> In fact this makes code easy to understand.

Agree, applied.

--
Jens Axboe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Dmitry Monakhov on 2 Mar 2010 23:00
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe(a)oracle.com> writes:

> On Sat, Feb 27 2010, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
>> merge_bvec_fn() returns bvec->bv_len on success. So we have to check
>> against this value. But in case of fs_optimization merge we compare
>> with wrong value. This patch must be included in
>> b428cd6da7e6559aca69aa2e3a526037d3f20403
>> But accidentally i've forgot to add this in the initial patch.
>> To make things straight let's replace all such checks.
>> In fact this makes code easy to understand.
>
> Agree, applied.
Ohh.. as you already know this patch break dm-layer. Sorry.
This is because dm->merge may return more than requested. So correct
check must test against less what requested. Correct patch attached.

From: Jens Axboe on 3 Mar 2010 02:40
On Wed, Mar 03 2010, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> Jens Axboe <jens.axboe(a)oracle.com> writes:
>
> > On Sat, Feb 27 2010, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> >> merge_bvec_fn() returns bvec->bv_len on success. So we have to check
> >> against this value. But in case of fs_optimization merge we compare
> >> with wrong value. This patch must be included in
> >> b428cd6da7e6559aca69aa2e3a526037d3f20403
> >> But accidentally i've forgot to add this in the initial patch.
> >> To make things straight let's replace all such checks.
> >> In fact this makes code easy to understand.
> >
> > Agree, applied.
> Ohh.. as you already know this patch break dm-layer. Sorry.
> This is because dm->merge may return more than requested. So correct
> check must test against less what requested. Correct patch attached.

Have you tested this with dm and md (ie actual users of the merge_bvec
functionality) this time?

--
Jens Axboe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Dmitry Monakhov on 3 Mar 2010 03:50
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe(a)oracle.com> writes:

> On Wed, Mar 03 2010, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
>> Jens Axboe <jens.axboe(a)oracle.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Sat, Feb 27 2010, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
>> >> merge_bvec_fn() returns bvec->bv_len on success. So we have to check
>> >> against this value. But in case of fs_optimization merge we compare
>> >> with wrong value. This patch must be included in
>> >> b428cd6da7e6559aca69aa2e3a526037d3f20403
>> >> But accidentally i've forgot to add this in the initial patch.
>> >> To make things straight let's replace all such checks.
>> >> In fact this makes code easy to understand.
>> >
>> > Agree, applied.
>> Ohh.. as you already know this patch break dm-layer. Sorry.
>> This is because dm->merge may return more than requested. So correct
>> check must test against less what requested. Correct patch attached.
>
> Have you tested this with dm and md (ie actual users of the merge_bvec
> functionality) this time?
Yes. This time both md and dm are ok.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Jens Axboe on 3 Mar 2010 07:30
On Wed, Mar 03 2010, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> Jens Axboe <jens.axboe(a)oracle.com> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 03 2010, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> >> Jens Axboe <jens.axboe(a)oracle.com> writes:
> >>
> >> > On Sat, Feb 27 2010, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> >> >> merge_bvec_fn() returns bvec->bv_len on success. So we have to check
> >> >> against this value. But in case of fs_optimization merge we compare
> >> >> with wrong value. This patch must be included in
> >> >> b428cd6da7e6559aca69aa2e3a526037d3f20403
> >> >> But accidentally i've forgot to add this in the initial patch.
> >> >> To make things straight let's replace all such checks.
> >> >> In fact this makes code easy to understand.
> >> >
> >> > Agree, applied.
> >> Ohh.. as you already know this patch break dm-layer. Sorry.
> >> This is because dm->merge may return more than requested. So correct
> >> check must test against less what requested. Correct patch attached.
> >
> > Have you tested this with dm and md (ie actual users of the merge_bvec
> > functionality) this time?
> Yes. This time both md and dm are ok.

Good, I'll queue it up for testing.

--
Jens Axboe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: atang tree: make SATA Asynchronous Notification work
Next: relay: move remove_buf_file inside relay_close_buf