Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Sat, 16 May 2009 00:18:42 +0900, Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> In commit c3a4d78c580de4edc9ef0f7c59812fb02ceb037f, while introducing
>> rq->resid_len, the default value of residue count was changed from
>> full count to zero. []
>
> So it's not a residue anymore, right? You should've renamed it to
> rq->count or something, then. Now we have this:
It still is. It just is restoring the original behavior.
>> +++ block/drivers/block/ub.c
>> @@ -781,8 +781,7 @@ static void ub_rw_cmd_done(struct ub_dev
>>
>> if (cmd->error == 0) {
>> if (blk_pc_request(rq)) {
>> - if (cmd->act_len < blk_rq_bytes(rq))
>> - rq->resid_len = blk_rq_bytes(rq) - cmd->act_len;
>> + rq->resid_len -= min(cmd->act_len, rq->resid_len);
>> scsi_status = 0;
>
> You are subtracting resid_len from itself. Just how in the world
> can this be correct?
>
> Even it if is, in fact, correct, it's such an eggregious violation
> of good style, that your good programmer's card is going to lose
> a big coupon and have a hole punched in it.
The original code was
if (cmd->act_len >= rq->data_len)
rq->data_len = 0;
else
rq->data_len -= cmd->act_len
So, I could have written
if (cmd->act_len >= rq->resid_len)
rq->resid_len = 0;
else
rq->resid_len -= cmd->act_len
Instead I wrote
rq->resid_len -= min(cmd->act_len, rq->resid_len);
It's just capping the amount to be subtracted so that resid_len
doesn't underflow. What is so wrong or bad style about that?
> This is not in Linus' tree yet, but I'm going to take a hard look
> at this once it shows up.
It would be great if you do before it hits Linus's tree.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
