Re: [PATCH 2/4] pass b_size to ->get_block()

[Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@us.ibm.com>]

On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 17:52 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > Pass amount of disk needs to be mapped to get_block().
> > This way one can modify the fs ->get_block() functions 
> > to map multiple blocks at the same time.
> 
> I can't say I terribly like this patch.  Initialising b_size all over the
> place seems fragile.

I went through all the in-kernel places where we call ->getblock()
and initialized b_size correctly.

> 
> We're _already_ setting bh.b_size to the right thing in
> alloc_page_buffers(), and for a bh which is attached to
> pagecache_page->private, there's no reason why b_size would ever change.

Good point.

> So what I think I'll do is to convert those places where you're needlessly
> assigning to b_size into temporary WARN_ON(b_size != blocksize).

Yep. 


> The only place where we need to initialise b_size is where we've got a
> non-pagecache bh allocated on the stack.
> 
> We need to be sure that no ->get_block() implementations write garbage into
> bh->b_size if something goes wrong.  b_size on a pagecache-based
> buffer_head must remain inviolate.

Good news is, filesystems that allocate a single block currently don't
care about b_size anyway.

I guess to be paranoid, we should add WARN_ON() or BUG_ON() in jfs, xfs,
ext3 (in -mm) ->getblock() to check for a valid b_size, before using it
(not being negitive, multiple of blocksize, not-a-huge-number type
checks ?).

Thanks,
Badari

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/