From: Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>
To: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 04/12] btrfs: get rid of trivial __btrfs_lookup_bio_sums() wrappers
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:42:31 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191126174131.GB657777@vader> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dc600214-0f19-b321-8573-6193b5f47e16@suse.com>
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 03:56:31PM +0200, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 20.11.19 г. 20:24 ч., Omar Sandoval wrote:
> > From: Omar Sandoval <osandov@fb.com>
> >
> > Currently, we have two wrappers for __btrfs_lookup_bio_sums():
> > btrfs_lookup_bio_sums_dio(), which is used for direct I/O, and
> > btrfs_lookup_bio_sums(), which is used everywhere else. The only
> > difference is that the _dio variant looks up csums starting at the given
> > offset instead of using the page index, which isn't actually direct
> > I/O-specific. Let's clean up the signature and return value of
> > __btrfs_lookup_bio_sums(), rename it to btrfs_lookup_bio_sums(), and get
> > rid of the trivial helpers.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Omar Sandoval <osandov@fb.com>
>
> Overall looks good but 2 nits, see below.
>
> In any case:
>
> Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Thanks!
> > ---
> > fs/btrfs/compression.c | 4 ++--
> > fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 4 +---
> > fs/btrfs/file-item.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++------------------
> > fs/btrfs/inode.c | 6 +++---
> > 4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/compression.c b/fs/btrfs/compression.c
> > index b05b361e2062..4df6f0c58dc9 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/compression.c
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/compression.c
> > @@ -660,7 +660,7 @@ blk_status_t btrfs_submit_compressed_read(struct inode *inode, struct bio *bio,
> >
> > if (!(BTRFS_I(inode)->flags & BTRFS_INODE_NODATASUM)) {
> > ret = btrfs_lookup_bio_sums(inode, comp_bio,
> > - sums);
> > + false, 0, sums);
> > BUG_ON(ret); /* -ENOMEM */
> > }
> >
> > @@ -689,7 +689,7 @@ blk_status_t btrfs_submit_compressed_read(struct inode *inode, struct bio *bio,
> > BUG_ON(ret); /* -ENOMEM */
> >
> > if (!(BTRFS_I(inode)->flags & BTRFS_INODE_NODATASUM)) {
> > - ret = btrfs_lookup_bio_sums(inode, comp_bio, sums);
> > + ret = btrfs_lookup_bio_sums(inode, comp_bio, false, 0, sums);
> > BUG_ON(ret); /* -ENOMEM */
> > }
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
> > index fe2b8765d9e6..4bc40bf49b0e 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
> > @@ -2787,9 +2787,7 @@ struct btrfs_dio_private;
> > int btrfs_del_csums(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
> > struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, u64 bytenr, u64 len);
> > blk_status_t btrfs_lookup_bio_sums(struct inode *inode, struct bio *bio,
> > - u8 *dst);
> > -blk_status_t btrfs_lookup_bio_sums_dio(struct inode *inode, struct bio *bio,
> > - u64 logical_offset);
> > + bool at_offset, u64 offset, u8 *dst);
> > int btrfs_insert_file_extent(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
> > struct btrfs_root *root,
> > u64 objectid, u64 pos,
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/file-item.c b/fs/btrfs/file-item.c
> > index 1a599f50837b..a87c40502267 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/file-item.c
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/file-item.c
> > @@ -148,8 +148,21 @@ int btrfs_lookup_file_extent(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > -static blk_status_t __btrfs_lookup_bio_sums(struct inode *inode, struct bio *bio,
> > - u64 logical_offset, u8 *dst, int dio)
> > +/**
> > + * btrfs_lookup_bio_sums - Look up checksums for a bio.
> > + * @inode: inode that the bio is for.
> > + * @bio: bio embedded in btrfs_io_bio.
> > + * @at_offset: If true, look up checksums for the extent at @c offset.
>
> nit: that @c is an editing artifact?
Oops, I mixed up kernel-doc with Doxygen. Fixed, thanks.
> On the other hand rather than
> having an explicit bool signifying whether we want a specific offset
> can't we simply check if offset is != 0 ?
Zero is a perfectly valid offset to have an extent at, but we could do
(u64)-1 instead. I'm not sure what's cleaner.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-26 17:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-20 18:24 [RFC PATCH v3 00/12] fs: interface for directly reading/writing compressed data Omar Sandoval
2019-11-20 18:24 ` [PATCH man-pages v2] Document encoded I/O Omar Sandoval
2019-12-05 18:58 ` [RFC PATCH v3 00/12] fs: interface for directly reading/writing compressed data Omar Sandoval
2019-11-20 18:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 01/12] iov_iter: add copy_struct_from_iter() Omar Sandoval
2019-11-20 18:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 02/12] fs: add O_ALLOW_ENCODED open flag Omar Sandoval
2019-11-20 18:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 03/12] fs: add RWF_ENCODED for reading/writing compressed data Omar Sandoval
2019-11-26 13:53 ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-11-26 17:36 ` Omar Sandoval
2019-11-27 9:00 ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-11-27 9:10 ` Omar Sandoval
2019-11-20 18:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 04/12] btrfs: get rid of trivial __btrfs_lookup_bio_sums() wrappers Omar Sandoval
2019-11-26 13:56 ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-11-26 17:42 ` Omar Sandoval [this message]
2019-11-20 18:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 05/12] btrfs: don't advance offset for compressed bios in btrfs_csum_one_bio() Omar Sandoval
2019-11-26 14:18 ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-11-26 17:50 ` Omar Sandoval
2019-11-20 18:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 06/12] btrfs: remove dead snapshot-aware defrag code Omar Sandoval
2019-11-26 15:13 ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-11-20 18:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 07/12] btrfs: make btrfs_ordered_extent naming consistent with btrfs_file_extent_item Omar Sandoval
2019-11-20 18:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 08/12] btrfs: add ram_bytes and offset to btrfs_ordered_extent Omar Sandoval
2019-11-27 10:13 ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-11-20 18:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 09/12] btrfs: support different disk extent size for delalloc Omar Sandoval
2019-11-27 10:33 ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-11-20 18:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 10/12] btrfs: optionally extend i_size in cow_file_range_inline() Omar Sandoval
2019-11-20 18:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 11/12] btrfs: implement RWF_ENCODED reads Omar Sandoval
2019-11-20 18:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 12/12] btrfs: implement RWF_ENCODED writes Omar Sandoval
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191126174131.GB657777@vader \
--to=osandov@osandov.com \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=cyphar@cyphar.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nborisov@suse.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).