From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>,
Arie van der Hoeven <arie.vanderhoeven@seagate.com>,
Tyler Erickson <tyler.erickson@seagate.com>,
Muhammad Ahmad <muhammad.ahmad@seagate.com>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
"andrea.righi@canonical.com" <andrea.righi@canonical.com>,
"glen.valante@linaro.org" <glen.valante@linaro.org>,
Michael English <michael.english@seagate.com>,
Andrew Ring <andrew.ring@seagate.com>,
Varun Boddu <varunreddy.boddu@seagate.com>,
Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@wdc.com>
Subject: Re: block: wrong return value by bio_end_sector?
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 10:35:38 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <12aa1043-14c3-0f95-6cb4-f7a021268ae4@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D4FC5552-B3C8-4118-B3C8-C6BF20C793B4@linaro.org>
On 9/30/22 9:59 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
> Hi Jens, Damien, all other possibly interested people,
> this is to raise attention on a mistake that has emerged in a
> thread on a bfq extension for multi-actuary drives [1].
>
> The mistake is apparently in the macro bio_end_sector (defined in
> include/linux/bio.h), which seems to be translated (incorrectly) as
> sector+size, and not as sector+size-1.
>
> For your convenience, I'm pasting a detailed description of the
> problem, by Tyler (description taken from the above thread [1]).
I'm a little confused - currently it returns non-inclusive end, the
proposed change just make it inclusive. In general in the kernel the
former is used, and this one follows that.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-30 16:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-30 15:59 Paolo Valente
2022-09-30 16:35 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2022-10-01 0:50 ` Damien Le Moal
2022-10-02 16:20 ` Paolo Valente
2022-10-02 22:33 ` Damien Le Moal
2022-10-04 8:46 ` Paolo Valente
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=12aa1043-14c3-0f95-6cb4-f7a021268ae4@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=andrea.righi@canonical.com \
--cc=andrew.ring@seagate.com \
--cc=arie.vanderhoeven@seagate.com \
--cc=damien.lemoal@wdc.com \
--cc=glen.valante@linaro.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michael.english@seagate.com \
--cc=muhammad.ahmad@seagate.com \
--cc=paolo.valente@linaro.org \
--cc=tyler.erickson@seagate.com \
--cc=varunreddy.boddu@seagate.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®