From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03E24C3A5A6 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:12:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CEDD20856 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:12:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="fICn6659" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7CEDD20856 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=oracle.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-erofs-bounces+linux-erofs=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46JPkN6X9qzDqsL for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 22:12:12 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=oracle.com (client-ip=141.146.126.78; helo=aserp2120.oracle.com; envelope-from=dan.carpenter@oracle.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=oracle.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="fICn6659"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from aserp2120.oracle.com (aserp2120.oracle.com [141.146.126.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46JPkF42fszDqC0 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 22:12:04 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x7SCApOd168816; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:11:57 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : in-reply-to; s=corp-2019-08-05; bh=jxuwhh6N6Ylboq2mCwfPlVJ1Ye3Dfi5dlfJtglOof1Q=; b=fICn6659VoWixS1b7QywOccoNdrMnfF4tZs1s+76TlMC1s0bE+zb9mgtH1sNOTmD1njx dQL60kCtGlzi/6pxF9j9VWPIQ6mYjS1/h514pRQzZNJjAOZe2zfXKUo0lYycyLrZRmg4 pHsS8F0OkSP/GL6si4LEV/z4o2ao7URs453NC6dvx6KBXycY6nFDWC15Ag3bGBHi8F/G 2ryUC6HgQxrWiYNeUqfP8OL/Ao5kuGeI8kmIkmXWs9Arf6w6j3EeqC3e9XqU/aPSpVrX 0G7R+MfnogLK1zNl143oFbUCRyJenutTyiMrpUIkcIlTqiYaakkk3rrctWbWaZO0H1ig aw== Received: from aserp3030.oracle.com (aserp3030.oracle.com [141.146.126.71]) by aserp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2unscq809r-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:11:57 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x7SC7gaF046358; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:11:57 GMT Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by aserp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2undupvw9k-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:11:57 +0000 Received: from abhmp0007.oracle.com (abhmp0007.oracle.com [141.146.116.13]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id x7SCBoPf020868; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:11:50 GMT Received: from kadam (/41.57.98.10) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 05:11:49 -0700 Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 15:11:44 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter To: Gao Xiang Subject: Re: [bug report] staging: erofs: introduce erofs_grab_bio Message-ID: <20190828121143.GC8372@kadam> References: <20190828105541.GA21320@mwanda> <20190828110249.GA56298@architecture4> <20190828113929.GA68628@architecture4> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190828113929.GA68628@architecture4> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9362 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=869 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1906280000 definitions=main-1908280131 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9362 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=925 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1906280000 definitions=main-1908280132 X-BeenThere: linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Linux EROFS file system List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, xiang@kernel.org, miaoxie@huawei.com Errors-To: linux-erofs-bounces+linux-erofs=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linux-erofs" On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 07:39:29PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote: > (p.s. It makes me little confused these subject prefixes are "[bug report]", if they are > really bugs, that is fine... If it be something unconfirmed (need our confirmation..,), > could you kindly change the prefix into some other representations...? I will still look > into all of them at least... and that makes me feel a bit better and easy.... thanks...) Of course I thought it *was* a bug... I've sent probably 1800 of these emails. It's a script but I look over the email before sending. Maybe when people start using the Link: tag I will be able to make these show up as reply to an email. Normally, I sent them out in a much more timely sort of way but all the erofs warnings show up as new with the move out of staging so I have been re-reviewing the warnings. So last August when this code was new, I must have seen the warning but read the code correctly. I checked before I sent this email to make sure we hadn't discusssed it before. But this time I got confused by the DBG_BUGON(). I decided to treat it as a no-op because it can be configured to do nothing if you have CONFIG_EROFS_FS_DEBUG disabled. Plus it has "DBG" in the name so it felt like debug code. But I ended up focussing on it instead of seeing the "(nofail ? __GFP_NOFAIL : 0)" bit. The DBG_BUGON() is unreachable and misleading nonsense fluff. :( regards, dan carpenter