在 2024/8/23 1:08, Mikulas Patocka 写道:
>
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2024, Chen Yufan wrote:
>
>> Use time_after_eq macro instead of opening it for readability.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chen Yufan <chenyufan@xxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/md/dm-writecache.c | 5 +++--
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-writecache.c b/drivers/md/dm-writecache.c
>> index 7ce8847b3..548d4d37e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/md/dm-writecache.c
>> +++ b/drivers/md/dm-writecache.c
>> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
>> #include <linux/pfn_t.h>
>> #include <linux/libnvdimm.h>
>> #include <linux/delay.h>
>> +#include <linux/jiffies.h>
>> #include "dm-io-tracker.h"
>>
>> #define DM_MSG_PREFIX "writecache"
>> @@ -1994,8 +1995,8 @@ static void writecache_writeback(struct work_struct *work)
>> while (!list_empty(&wc->lru) &&
>> (wc->writeback_all ||
>> wc->freelist_size + wc->writeback_size <= wc->freelist_low_watermark ||
>> - (jiffies - container_of(wc->lru.prev, struct wc_entry, lru)->age >=
>> - wc->max_age - wc->max_age / MAX_AGE_DIV))) {
>> + (time_after_eq(jiffies, container_of(wc->lru.prev, struct wc_entry, lru)->age +
>> + (wc->max_age - wc->max_age / MAX_AGE_DIV))))) {
>>
>> n_walked++;
>> if (unlikely(n_walked > WRITEBACK_LATENCY) &&
>> --
>> 2.39.0
> I'm not sure about this. The old and new code is not really equivalent.
>
> Mikulas
The code here is susceptible to overflow issues, and the time_*() macros
can handle this.
Chen
>
