[PATCH] block: Fix spelling mistake in comments

[PATCH] block: Fix spelling mistake in comments

[Zhang Jiaming]

There are some typos(dones't, waitting) in comments.
Fix it.

Signed-off-by: Zhang Jiaming <jiaming@nfschina.com>
---
 drivers/md/raid5-cache.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
index 83c184eddbda..4b799005eb6e 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ struct r5l_log {
 					 * reclaimed.  if it's 0, reclaim spaces
 					 * used by io_units which are in
 					 * IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END state (eg, reclaim
-					 * dones't wait for specific io_unit
+					 * doesn't wait for specific io_unit
 					 * switching to IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END
 					 * state) */
 	wait_queue_head_t iounit_wait;
@@ -1327,9 +1327,9 @@ static void r5l_write_super_and_discard_space(struct r5l_log *log,
 	 * superblock is updated to new log tail. Updating superblock (either
 	 * directly call md_update_sb() or depend on md thread) must hold
 	 * reconfig mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
-	 * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waitting
-	 * for all IO finish, hence waitting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
-	 * thread is calling this function and waitting for reconfig mutex. So
+	 * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting
+	 * for all IO finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
+	 * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig mutex. So
 	 * there is a deadlock. We workaround this issue with a trylock.
 	 * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig mutex
 	 */
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH] block: Fix spelling mistake in comments

[Paul Menzel]

Dear Zhang,


Thank you for your patch. Some nits.

Am 04.07.22 um 03:23 schrieb Zhang Jiaming:
> There are some typos(dones't, waitting) in comments.
> Fix it.

Please add a space before the (. “Fix it.” also fits on the line above, 
and maybe use plural in the commit message summary. For the body, maybe:

Fix spelling of dones't and waitting in comments.

> Signed-off-by: Zhang Jiaming <jiaming@nfschina.com>
> ---
>   drivers/md/raid5-cache.c | 8 ++++----
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
> index 83c184eddbda..4b799005eb6e 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
> @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ struct r5l_log {
>   					 * reclaimed.  if it's 0, reclaim spaces
>   					 * used by io_units which are in
>   					 * IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END state (eg, reclaim
> -					 * dones't wait for specific io_unit
> +					 * doesn't wait for specific io_unit
>   					 * switching to IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END
>   					 * state) */
>   	wait_queue_head_t iounit_wait;
> @@ -1327,9 +1327,9 @@ static void r5l_write_super_and_discard_space(struct r5l_log *log,
>   	 * superblock is updated to new log tail. Updating superblock (either
>   	 * directly call md_update_sb() or depend on md thread) must hold
>   	 * reconfig mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
> -	 * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waitting
> -	 * for all IO finish, hence waitting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
> -	 * thread is calling this function and waitting for reconfig mutex. So
> +	 * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting
> +	 * for all IO finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
> +	 * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig mutex. So
>   	 * there is a deadlock. We workaround this issue with a trylock.
>   	 * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig mutex
>   	 */

Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>


Kind regards,

Paul

[PATCH] block: Fix spelling mistakes in comments

[Zhang Jiaming]

Fix spelling of dones't and waitting in comments.

Signed-off-by: Zhang Jiaming <jiaming@nfschina.com>
Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>
---
 drivers/md/raid5-cache.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
index 83c184eddbda..4b799005eb6e 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ struct r5l_log {
 					 * reclaimed.  if it's 0, reclaim spaces
 					 * used by io_units which are in
 					 * IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END state (eg, reclaim
-					 * dones't wait for specific io_unit
+					 * doesn't wait for specific io_unit
 					 * switching to IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END
 					 * state) */
 	wait_queue_head_t iounit_wait;
@@ -1327,9 +1327,9 @@ static void r5l_write_super_and_discard_space(struct r5l_log *log,
 	 * superblock is updated to new log tail. Updating superblock (either
 	 * directly call md_update_sb() or depend on md thread) must hold
 	 * reconfig mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
-	 * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waitting
-	 * for all IO finish, hence waitting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
-	 * thread is calling this function and waitting for reconfig mutex. So
+	 * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting
+	 * for all IO finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
+	 * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig mutex. So
 	 * there is a deadlock. We workaround this issue with a trylock.
 	 * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig mutex
 	 */
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH] block: Fix spelling mistakes in comments

[Daniel K.]

On 7/4/22 10:05, Zhang Jiaming wrote:
> Fix spelling of dones't and waitting in comments.

Version your patches, you're now at v2. [PATCH v2] ...

Please find a few suggestions below as to what can be fixed in this
block of text as you're making a pass over it.


> @@ -1327,9 +1327,9 @@ static void r5l_write_super_and_discard_space(struct r5l_log *log,
>  	 * superblock is updated to new log tail. Updating superblock (either
>  	 * directly call md_update_sb() or depend on md thread) must hold
>  	 * reconfig mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
> -	 * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waitting
> -	 * for all IO finish, hence waitting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
> -	 * thread is calling this function and waitting for reconfig mutex. So
> +	 * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting

                          held

> +	 * for all IO finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim

              all IO to finish

> +	 * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig mutex. So
>  	 * there is a deadlock. We workaround this issue with a trylock.
>  	 * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig mutex
>  	 */

There are several mentions of 'reconfig mutex' that should probably be
'reconfig_mutex'. What's the correct way to refer to a mutex in comments
like the above?


Daniel K.

[PATCH v2] block: Fix spelling mistakes in comments

[Zhang Jiaming]

Fix spelling of dones't and waitting in comments.
Fix tense mistakes of hold and finsh in comments.
Use underline to connecting reconfig and mutex.

Signed-off-by: Zhang Jiaming <jiaming@nfschina.com>
Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>
---
 drivers/md/raid5-cache.c | 12 ++++++------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
index 83c184eddbda..8d5154d94f86 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ struct r5l_log {
 					 * reclaimed.  if it's 0, reclaim spaces
 					 * used by io_units which are in
 					 * IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END state (eg, reclaim
-					 * dones't wait for specific io_unit
+					 * doesn't wait for specific io_unit
 					 * switching to IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END
 					 * state) */
 	wait_queue_head_t iounit_wait;
@@ -1326,12 +1326,12 @@ static void r5l_write_super_and_discard_space(struct r5l_log *log,
 	 * Discard could zero data, so before discard we must make sure
 	 * superblock is updated to new log tail. Updating superblock (either
 	 * directly call md_update_sb() or depend on md thread) must hold
-	 * reconfig mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
-	 * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waitting
-	 * for all IO finish, hence waitting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
-	 * thread is calling this function and waitting for reconfig mutex. So
+	 * reconfig_mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
+	 * reconfig_mutex held. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting
+	 * for all IO to finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
+	 * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig_mutex. So
 	 * there is a deadlock. We workaround this issue with a trylock.
-	 * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig mutex
+	 * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig_mutex
 	 */
 	set_mask_bits(&mddev->sb_flags, 0,
 		BIT(MD_SB_CHANGE_DEVS) | BIT(MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING));
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH v2] block: Fix spelling mistakes in comments

[Song Liu]

On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 7:26 PM Zhang Jiaming <jiaming@nfschina.com> wrote:
>
> Fix spelling of dones't and waitting in comments.
> Fix tense mistakes of hold and finsh in comments.
> Use underline to connecting reconfig and mutex.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Jiaming <jiaming@nfschina.com>
> Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>

Sorry for getting on this late.

AFAICT, this one doesn't apply any more (conflict with some of your
other fixes). Could you please resend?

Thanks,
Song

> ---
>  drivers/md/raid5-cache.c | 12 ++++++------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
> index 83c184eddbda..8d5154d94f86 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
> @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ struct r5l_log {
>                                          * reclaimed.  if it's 0, reclaim spaces
>                                          * used by io_units which are in
>                                          * IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END state (eg, reclaim
> -                                        * dones't wait for specific io_unit
> +                                        * doesn't wait for specific io_unit
>                                          * switching to IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END
>                                          * state) */
>         wait_queue_head_t iounit_wait;
> @@ -1326,12 +1326,12 @@ static void r5l_write_super_and_discard_space(struct r5l_log *log,
>          * Discard could zero data, so before discard we must make sure
>          * superblock is updated to new log tail. Updating superblock (either
>          * directly call md_update_sb() or depend on md thread) must hold
> -        * reconfig mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
> -        * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waitting
> -        * for all IO finish, hence waitting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
> -        * thread is calling this function and waitting for reconfig mutex. So
> +        * reconfig_mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
> +        * reconfig_mutex held. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting
> +        * for all IO to finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
> +        * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig_mutex. So
>          * there is a deadlock. We workaround this issue with a trylock.
> -        * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig mutex
> +        * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig_mutex
>          */
>         set_mask_bits(&mddev->sb_flags, 0,
>                 BIT(MD_SB_CHANGE_DEVS) | BIT(MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING));
> --
> 2.34.1
>

[PATCH v3] md/raid5-cache: Resolve patch confilcts

[Zhang Jiaming]

Resolve conflicts when applying patches.

Signed-off-by: Zhang Jiaming <jiaming@nfschina.com>
---
 drivers/md/raid5-cache.c | 12 ++++++------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
index 058d82e..a4a84a0 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ struct r5l_log {
 					 * reclaimed.  if it's 0, reclaim spaces
 					 * used by io_units which are in
 					 * IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END state (eg, reclaim
-					 * dones't wait for specific io_unit
+					 * doesn't wait for specific io_unit
 					 * switching to IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END
 					 * state) */
 	wait_queue_head_t iounit_wait;
@@ -1326,12 +1326,12 @@ static void r5l_write_super_and_discard_space(struct r5l_log *log,
 	 * Discard could zero data, so before discard we must make sure
 	 * superblock is updated to new log tail. Updating superblock (either
 	 * directly call md_update_sb() or depend on md thread) must hold
-	 * reconfig mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
-	 * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting
-	 * for all IO finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
-	 * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig mutex. So
+	 * reconfig_mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
+	 * reconfig_mutex held. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting
+	 * for all IO to finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
+	 * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig_mutex. So
 	 * there is a deadlock. We workaround this issue with a trylock.
-	 * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig mutex
+	 * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig_mutex
 	 */
 	set_mask_bits(&mddev->sb_flags, 0,
 		BIT(MD_SB_CHANGE_DEVS) | BIT(MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING));
-- 
2.11.0

Re: [PATCH v3] md/raid5-cache: Resolve patch confilcts

[Song Liu]

On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 8:09 PM Zhang Jiaming <jiaming@nfschina.com> wrote:
>
> Resolve conflicts when applying patches.

^^^^^^ this is not a proper commit log. If we need something that is part
of the patch/email, but not part of the commit log, we can add below

>
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Jiaming <jiaming@nfschina.com>

Signed-off-by: ...
---
git-am will remove the message here (between two '---').
---
drivers/md/raid5-cache.c | 12 ++++++------


> ---
>  drivers/md/raid5-cache.c | 12 ++++++------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
> index 058d82e..a4a84a0 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
> @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ struct r5l_log {
>                                          * reclaimed.  if it's 0, reclaim spaces
>                                          * used by io_units which are in
>                                          * IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END state (eg, reclaim
> -                                        * dones't wait for specific io_unit
> +                                        * doesn't wait for specific io_unit
>                                          * switching to IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END
>                                          * state) */
>         wait_queue_head_t iounit_wait;
> @@ -1326,12 +1326,12 @@ static void r5l_write_super_and_discard_space(struct r5l_log *log,
>          * Discard could zero data, so before discard we must make sure
>          * superblock is updated to new log tail. Updating superblock (either
>          * directly call md_update_sb() or depend on md thread) must hold
> -        * reconfig mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
> -        * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting
> -        * for all IO finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
> -        * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig mutex. So
> +        * reconfig_mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
> +        * reconfig_mutex held. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting
> +        * for all IO to finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
> +        * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig_mutex. So
>          * there is a deadlock. We workaround this issue with a trylock.
> -        * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig mutex
> +        * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig_mutex
>          */
>         set_mask_bits(&mddev->sb_flags, 0,
>                 BIT(MD_SB_CHANGE_DEVS) | BIT(MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING));
> --
> 2.11.0
>

[PATCH v3] block: Fix spelling mistakes in comments

[Zhang Jiaming]

Fix spelling of dones't and waitting in comments.
Fix tense mistakes of hold and finsh in comments.
Use underline to connecting reconfig and mutex.

Signed-off-by: Zhang Jiaming <jiaming@nfschina.com>
---
v3: Resolve conflicts when applying patches.
---
---
 drivers/md/raid5-cache.c | 12 ++++++------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
index 058d82e..a4a84a0 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ struct r5l_log {
 					 * reclaimed.  if it's 0, reclaim spaces
 					 * used by io_units which are in
 					 * IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END state (eg, reclaim
-					 * dones't wait for specific io_unit
+					 * doesn't wait for specific io_unit
 					 * switching to IO_UNIT_STRIPE_END
 					 * state) */
 	wait_queue_head_t iounit_wait;
@@ -1326,12 +1326,12 @@ static void r5l_write_super_and_discard_space(struct r5l_log *log,
 	 * Discard could zero data, so before discard we must make sure
 	 * superblock is updated to new log tail. Updating superblock (either
 	 * directly call md_update_sb() or depend on md thread) must hold
-	 * reconfig mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
-	 * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting
-	 * for all IO finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
-	 * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig mutex. So
+	 * reconfig_mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
+	 * reconfig_mutex held. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting
+	 * for all IO to finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
+	 * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig_mutex. So
 	 * there is a deadlock. We workaround this issue with a trylock.
-	 * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig mutex
+	 * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig_mutex
 	 */
 	set_mask_bits(&mddev->sb_flags, 0,
 		BIT(MD_SB_CHANGE_DEVS) | BIT(MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING));
-- 
2.11.0