Re: [PATCH v2 00/19] bio: check return values of bio_add_page

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

 



On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 04:41:58PM +0000, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> On 30.03.23 17:52, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 03:43:42AM -0700, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> >> We have two functions for adding a page to a bio, __bio_add_page() which is
> >> used to add a single page to a freshly created bio and bio_add_page() which is
> >> used to add a page to an existing bio.
> >>
> >> While __bio_add_page() is expected to succeed, bio_add_page() can fail.
> >>
> >> This series converts the callers of bio_add_page() which can easily use
> >> __bio_add_page() to using it and checks the return of bio_add_page() for
> >> callers that don't work on a freshly created bio.
> >>
> >> Lastly it marks bio_add_page() as __must_check so we don't have to go again
> >> and audit all callers.
> >>
> >> Changes to v1:
> >> - Removed pointless comment pointed out by Willy
> >> - Changed commit messages pointed out by Damien
> >> - Colledted Damien's Reviews and Acks
> >>
> >> Johannes Thumshirn (19):
> > 
> >>   btrfs: repair: use __bio_add_page for adding single page
> >>   btrfs: raid56: use __bio_add_page to add single page
> > 
> > The btrfs patches added to misc-next, thanks.
> > 
> 
> Thanks but wouldn't it make more sense for Jens to pick up all of them?
> The last patch in the series flips bio_add_pages() over to
> __must_check and so it'll create an interdependency between the
> btrfs and the block tree.

I'd rather take it via btrfs tree, this avoids future merge conflicts.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux