struct io panic on raid1 - Re: block: unify flags for struct bio and struct request will kernel panic
in [Kernel]
|
From: Christoph Hellwig on 7 Jul 2010 19:20 On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 07:05:39AM +0800, Takeo Tung wrote: > Dear Christoph, > > I was check the patch again. I found the panic status haapen on Soft RAID > 1. I review it. found some define using bool, so some like ( x & REQ_SYNC) > only 0 or 1. > so if bi_rw = rw | sync will bi_rw = rw | 0 or rw | 1. not rw | ( 1 << > __REQ_SYNC). > > So I write a patch is fix it. seems normal now. could you review the patch > or any comment? The patch looks correct to me, although your mailer mangled the whitespace badly. If Neil wants to keep the flag as bool we could also add a !! around the bit flag checks. -- 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: Takeo Tung on 7 Jul 2010 20:50 Hello, ok. I rewrite the patch back to bool and re-add bio_rw_flagged fucntion. pls review it and any comment? Thanks, Takeo Tung -------------------------------------------------- From: "Neil Brown" <neilb(a)suse.de> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 7:48 AM To: "Christoph Hellwig" <hch(a)lst.de> Cc: "Takeo Tung" <kernel(a)takeo.idv.tw>; "Michal Marek" <mmarek(a)suse.cz>; <linux-kernel(a)vger.kernel.org>; <viro(a)zeniv.linux.org.uk>; <sfr(a)canb.auug.org.au> Subject: Re: [PATCH] struct io panic on raid1 - Re: block: unify flags for struct bio and struct request will kernel panic > On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 01:17:32 +0200 > Christoph Hellwig <hch(a)lst.de> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 07:05:39AM +0800, Takeo Tung wrote: >> > Dear Christoph, >> > >> > I was check the patch again. I found the panic status haapen on Soft >> > RAID >> > 1. I review it. found some define using bool, so some like ( x & >> > REQ_SYNC) >> > only 0 or 1. >> > so if bi_rw = rw | sync will bi_rw = rw | 0 or rw | 1. not rw | ( 1 << >> > __REQ_SYNC). >> > >> > So I write a patch is fix it. seems normal now. could you review the >> > patch >> > or any comment? >> >> The patch looks correct to me, although your mailer mangled the >> whitespace badly. If Neil wants to keep the flag as bool we could >> also add a !! around the bit flag checks. > > I think it is best to make them "unsigned long" holding the actual but. > They were only made 'bool' because that is was bio_rw_flagged() returned. > Converting to a bool then back to a bit-flag is unnecessary. > > Thanks, > NeilBrown > -- > 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: Takeo Tung on 7 Jul 2010 21:50 Dear Neil, Ok. bcoz I don't sure you like define is 'bool' or 'unsigned long', if using 'unsigned long', I no problem now. sorry for my poor english. Thanks, Takeo Tung -------------------------------------------------- From: "Neil Brown" <neilb(a)suse.de> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 9:15 AM To: "Takeo Tung" <kernel(a)takeo.idv.tw> Cc: "Christoph Hellwig" <hch(a)lst.de>; "Michal Marek" <mmarek(a)suse.cz>; <linux-kernel(a)vger.kernel.org>; <viro(a)zeniv.linux.org.uk>; <sfr(a)canb.auug.org.au> Subject: Re: [PATCH] struct io panic on raid1 - Re: block: unify flags for struct bio and struct request will kernel panic > On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 08:43:38 +0800 > "Takeo Tung" <kernel(a)takeo.idv.tw> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> ok. I rewrite the patch back to bool and re-add bio_rw_flagged fucntion. >> pls >> review it and any comment? > > I'm not sure why you did that. > I meant to say that I liked the fact that you had changed from 'bool' to > 'unsigned long' and that I thought using 'bool' was unnecessary. Maybe I > didn't say that very clearly. > > It doesn't matter to me particularly which approach is used, but please > don't > re-introduce bio_rw_flagged because you think I want it - I don't. > > Thanks, > NeilBrown > >> >> Thanks, >> Takeo Tung >> >> -------------------------------------------------- >> From: "Neil Brown" <neilb(a)suse.de> >> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 7:48 AM >> To: "Christoph Hellwig" <hch(a)lst.de> >> Cc: "Takeo Tung" <kernel(a)takeo.idv.tw>; "Michal Marek" <mmarek(a)suse.cz>; >> <linux-kernel(a)vger.kernel.org>; <viro(a)zeniv.linux.org.uk>; >> <sfr(a)canb.auug.org.au> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] struct io panic on raid1 - Re: block: unify flags >> for >> struct bio and struct request will kernel panic >> >> > On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 01:17:32 +0200 >> > Christoph Hellwig <hch(a)lst.de> wrote: >> > >> >> On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 07:05:39AM +0800, Takeo Tung wrote: >> >> > Dear Christoph, >> >> > >> >> > I was check the patch again. I found the panic status haapen on Soft >> >> > RAID >> >> > 1. I review it. found some define using bool, so some like ( x & >> >> > REQ_SYNC) >> >> > only 0 or 1. >> >> > so if bi_rw = rw | sync will bi_rw = rw | 0 or rw | 1. not rw | ( 1 >> >> > << >> >> > __REQ_SYNC). >> >> > >> >> > So I write a patch is fix it. seems normal now. could you review the >> >> > patch >> >> > or any comment? >> >> >> >> The patch looks correct to me, although your mailer mangled the >> >> whitespace badly. If Neil wants to keep the flag as bool we could >> >> also add a !! around the bit flag checks. >> > >> > I think it is best to make them "unsigned long" holding the actual but. >> > They were only made 'bool' because that is was bio_rw_flagged() >> > returned. >> > Converting to a bool then back to a bit-flag is unnecessary. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > NeilBrown >> > -- >> > 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/ >> > >> > > -- > 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/ > > -- 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/
|
Pages: 1 Prev: [RFC/RFT PATCH] cfq-iosched: Implement cfq group idling Next: FYI: mmap_sem OOM patch |