From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030238AbaDBTf6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2014 15:35:58 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:21929 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932993AbaDBTf4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2014 15:35:56 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,782,1389772800"; d="scan'208";a="505576307" Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 15:27:59 -0400 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Jan Kara Cc: Matthew Wilcox , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 04/22] Change direct_access calling convention Message-ID: <20140402192759.GD27299@linux.intel.com> References: <214af2a38d840d0b8e983d39d03711d1292bc2d6.1395591795.git.matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com> <20140329163028.GD1211@quack.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140329163028.GD1211@quack.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 05:30:28PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > @@ -379,7 +379,9 @@ static int brd_direct_access(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector, > > *kaddr = page_address(page); > > *pfn = page_to_pfn(page); > > > > - return 0; > > + /* Could optimistically check to see if the next page in the > > + * file is mapped to the next page of physical RAM */ > > + return PAGE_SIZE; > This should be min_t(long, PAGE_SIZE, size), shouldn't it? Yes, it should. In practice, I don't think anyone's calling it with size < PAGE_SIZE, but we might as well future-proof it. > > @@ -866,25 +866,26 @@ fail: > > bio_io_error(bio); > > } > > > > -static int > > +static long > > dcssblk_direct_access (struct block_device *bdev, sector_t secnum, > > - void **kaddr, unsigned long *pfn) > > + void **kaddr, unsigned long *pfn, long size) > > { > > struct dcssblk_dev_info *dev_info; > > - unsigned long pgoff; > > + unsigned long offset, dev_sz; > > - return 0; > > + return min_t(unsigned long, size, dev_sz - offset); > ^^^ Why unsigned? Everything seems to be long... offset is unsigned long ... but might as well do the comparison in signed as unsigned. 'size' shouldn't be passed in as < 0 anyway.