On 2/23/20 4:54 AM, Amir Goldstein wrote:
On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 4:07 AM Allison Collins
<allison.henderson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This patch embeds an xfs_name in xfs_da_args, replacing the name, namelen, and flags
members. This helps to clean up the xfs_da_args structure and make it more uniform
with the new xfs_name parameter being passed around.
Signed-off-by: Allison Collins <allison.henderson@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c | 37 +++++++-------
fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr_leaf.c | 104 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr_remote.c | 2 +-
fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_da_btree.c | 6 ++-
fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_da_btree.h | 4 +-
fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_dir2.c | 18 +++----
fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_dir2_block.c | 6 +--
fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_dir2_leaf.c | 6 +--
fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_dir2_node.c | 8 ++--
fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_dir2_sf.c | 30 ++++++------
fs/xfs/scrub/attr.c | 12 ++---
fs/xfs/xfs_trace.h | 20 ++++----
12 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 123 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c
index 6717f47..9acdb23 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c
@@ -72,13 +72,12 @@ xfs_attr_args_init(
args->geo = dp->i_mount->m_attr_geo;
args->whichfork = XFS_ATTR_FORK;
args->dp = dp;
- args->flags = flags;
- args->name = name->name;
- args->namelen = name->len;
- if (args->namelen >= MAXNAMELEN)
+ memcpy(&args->name, name, sizeof(struct xfs_name));
Maybe xfs_name_copy and xfs_name_equal are in order?
You are suggesting to add xfs_name_copy and xfs_name_equal helpers? I'm
not sure there's a use case yet for xfs_name_equal, at least not in this
set. And I think people indicated that they preferred the memcpy in
past reviews rather than handling each member of the xfs_name struct.
Unless I misunderstood the question, I'm not sure there is much left for
a xfs_name_copy helper to cover that the memcpy does not?
+ /* Use name now stored in args */
+ name = &args.name;
+
It seem that the context of these comments be clear in the future.
You are asking to add more context to the comment? How about:
/*
* Use name now stored in args. Abandon the local name
* parameter as it will not be updated in the subroutines
*/
Does that help some?
args.value = value;
args.valuelen = valuelen;
args.op_flags = XFS_DA_OP_ADDNAME | XFS_DA_OP_OKNOENT;
@@ -372,7 +374,7 @@ xfs_attr_set(
*/
if (XFS_IFORK_Q(dp) == 0) {
int sf_size = sizeof(xfs_attr_sf_hdr_t) +
- XFS_ATTR_SF_ENTSIZE_BYNAME(args.namelen, valuelen);
+ XFS_ATTR_SF_ENTSIZE_BYNAME(name->len, valuelen);
error = xfs_bmap_add_attrfork(dp, sf_size, rsvd);
if (error)
@@ -457,6 +459,9 @@ xfs_attr_remove(
if (error)
return error;
+ /* Use name now stored in args */
+ name = &args.name;
+
/*
* we have no control over the attribute names that userspace passes us
* to remove, so we have to allow the name lookup prior to attribute
@@ -532,10 +537,10 @@ xfs_attr_shortform_addname(xfs_da_args_t *args)
trace_xfs_attr_sf_addname(args);
retval = xfs_attr_shortform_lookup(args);
- if ((args->flags & ATTR_REPLACE) && (retval == -ENOATTR)) {
+ if ((args->name.type & ATTR_REPLACE) && (retval == -ENOATTR)) {
return retval;
} else if (retval == -EEXIST) {
- if (args->flags & ATTR_CREATE)
+ if (args->name.type & ATTR_CREATE)
return retval;
retval = xfs_attr_shortform_remove(args);
if (retval)
@@ -545,15 +550,15 @@ xfs_attr_shortform_addname(xfs_da_args_t *args)
* that the leaf format add routine won't trip over the attr
* not being around.
*/
- args->flags &= ~ATTR_REPLACE;
+ args->name.type &= ~ATTR_REPLACE;
This doesn't look good it looks like a hack.
Even if want to avoid growing struct xfs_name we can store two shorts instead
of overloading int type with flags.
type doesn't even need more than a single byte, because XFS_DIR3_FT_WHT
is not used and will never be used on-disk.
Thanks,
Amir.
The exact use of .type has gone around a few times since this patch
started, which was actually all the way back in parent pointers. :-)
Initially the xfs_name struct replaced anything that passed all three
parameters, and then later we decided that flags should stay separate
for top level get/set/remove routines, but become integrated below the
*_args routines. I don't recall people being concerned about growing
the struct, though a union seems reasonable to resolve the naming
weirdness. I would like to have a little more feedback from folks
though just to make sure everyones in agreement since this one's gone
through quite few reviews already. Thanks all!
Allison
