Re: [PATCH v3 19/19] block: mark bio_add_page as __must_check

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 19/04/2023 16:19, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 04:09:29PM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
Now that all users of bio_add_page check for the return value, mark
bio_add_page as __must_check.

Should probably add __must_check to bio_add_folio too?  If this is
really the way you want to go ... means we also need a
__bio_add_folio().

I admit I haven't thought of folios, mea culpa.

3 of the callers of bio_add_folio() don't check the return value:
$ git grep -E '\sbio_add_folio\b'
fs/iomap/buffered-io.c:         bio_add_folio(ctx->bio, folio, plen, poff);
fs/iomap/buffered-io.c: bio_add_folio(&bio, folio, plen, poff);
fs/iomap/buffered-io.c: bio_add_folio(wpc->ioend->io_bio, folio, len, poff);

But from a quick look they look OK to me.

Does that look reasonable to you:

diff --git a/block/bio.c b/block/bio.c
index fd11614bba4d..f3a3524b53e4 100644
--- a/block/bio.c
+++ b/block/bio.c
@@ -1138,6 +1138,14 @@ int bio_add_page(struct bio *bio, struct page *page,
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(bio_add_page);

+void __bio_add_folio(struct bio *bio, struct folio *folio, size_t len,
+                    size_t off)
+{
+       WARN_ON_ONCE(len > UINT_MAX);
+       WARN_ON_ONCE(off > UINT_MAX);
+       __bio_add_page(bio, &folio->page, len, off);
+}
+
 /**
  * bio_add_folio - Attempt to add part of a folio to a bio.
  * @bio: BIO to add to.


Byte,
	Johannes

--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel




[Index of Archives]     [DM Crypt]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux