On 11/6/24 4:44 PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 11/7/24 08:20, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On 11/6/24 3:13 PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>>> diff --git a/block/blk-zoned.c b/block/blk-zoned.c
>>> index a287577d1ad6..7a7855555d6d 100644
>>> --- a/block/blk-zoned.c
>>> +++ b/block/blk-zoned.c
>>> @@ -350,9 +350,14 @@ int blkdev_zone_mgmt_ioctl(struct block_device *bdev, blk_mode_t mode,
>>>
>>> static inline bool disk_zone_is_conv(struct gendisk *disk, sector_t sector)
>>> {
>>> - if (!disk->conv_zones_bitmap)
>>> - return false;
>>> - return test_bit(disk_zone_no(disk, sector), disk->conv_zones_bitmap);
>>> + bool is_conv;
>>> +
>>> + rcu_read_lock();
>>> + is_conv = disk->conv_zones_bitmap &&
>>> + test_bit(disk_zone_no(disk, sector), disk->conv_zones_bitmap);
>>> + rcu_read_unlock();
>>> +
>>> + return is_conv;
>>> }
>>
>> The above code can be simplified significantly by using guard(rcu).
>
> I personally dislike very much annotations that hide code. So unless
> Jens prefers using guard(rcu), I would prefer leaving the code as it
> is.
I don't mind it, and I do use it myself when it makes sense - but imho
it's up to the person writing the code, particularly when it's their
code in the first place.
--
Jens Axboe
