From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2018 09:48:21 +0800
Subject: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH V11 07/19] fs/buffer.c: use bvec
 iterator to truncate the bio
In-Reply-To: <20181122105849.GA30066@lst.de>
References: <20181121032327.8434-1-ming.lei@redhat.com>
	<20181121032327.8434-8-ming.lei@redhat.com>
	<20181122105849.GA30066@lst.de>
Message-ID: <20181123014820.GA20110@ming.t460p>
List-Id: <cluster-devel.redhat.com>
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 11:58:49AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Btw, given that this is the last user of bvec_last_segment after my
> other patches I think we should kill bvec_last_segment and do something
> like this here:
> 
> 
> diff --git a/fs/buffer.c b/fs/buffer.c
> index fa37ad52e962..af5e135d2b83 100644
> --- a/fs/buffer.c
> +++ b/fs/buffer.c
> @@ -2981,6 +2981,14 @@ static void end_bio_bh_io_sync(struct bio *bio)
>  	bio_put(bio);
>  }
>  
> +static void zero_trailing_sectors(struct bio_vec *bvec, unsigned bytes)
> +{
> +	unsigned last_page = (bvec->bv_offset + bvec->bv_len - 1) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> +
> +	zero_user(nth_page(bvec->bv_page, last_page),
> +		  bvec->bv_offset % PAGE_SIZE + bvec->bv_len, bytes);
> +}

The above 'start' parameter is figured out as wrong, and the computation
isn't very obvious, so I'd suggest to keep bvec_last_segment().

Thanks,
Ming