On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 02:31:47PM -0700, Jane Chu wrote:
> dax_recovery_write() dax op is only required for DAX device that
> export DAXDEV_RECOVERY indicating its capability to recover from
> poisons.
>
> DM may be nested, if part of the base dax devices forming a DM
> device support dax recovery, the DM device is marked with such
> capability.
I'd fold this into the previous 2 patches as the flag and method
are clearly very tightly coupled.
> +static size_t linear_dax_recovery_write(struct dm_target *ti, pgoff_t pgoff,
> + void *addr, size_t bytes, struct iov_iter *i)
Function line continuations use two tab indentations or alignment after
the opening brace.
> +{
> + struct dax_device *dax_dev = linear_dax_pgoff(ti, &pgoff);
> +
> + if (!dax_recovery_capable(dax_dev))
> + return (size_t) -EOPNOTSUPP;
Returning a negativ errno through an unsigned argument looks dangerous.
> + /* recovery_write: optional operation. */
And explanation of what the method is use for might be more useful than
mentioning that is is optional.
> + size_t (*recovery_write)(struct dax_device *, pgoff_t, void *, size_t,
> + struct iov_iter *);
Spelling out the arguments tends to help readability, but then again
none of the existing methods does it.
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
