On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 11:44:35AM +0800, Yangtao Li wrote:
> On 2023/6/29 0:46, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 05:34:54PM +0800, Yangtao Li wrote:
> > > Introduce queue_logical_block_mask() and bdev_logical_block_mask()
> > > to simplify code, which replace (queue_logical_block_size(q) - 1)
> > > and (bdev_logical_block_size(bdev) - 1).
> > The thing is that I know what queue_logical_block_size - 1 does.
> > That's the low bits. _Which_ bits are queue_logical_block_mask?
> > The high bits or the low bits? And before you say "It's obviously",
> > we have both ways round in the kernel today.
>
>
> I guess for this you mentioned, can we name it bdev_logical_block_lmask and
> queue_logical_block_lmask?
{bdev,queue}_offset_in_lba() ?
--D
>
> Thx,
>
> >
> > I am not in favour of this change. I might be in favour of bool
> > queue_logical_block_aligned(q, x), but even then it doesn't seem worth
> > the bits.
