public inbox for linux-block@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Zhiqiang Liu <liuzhiqiang26@huawei.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Mingfangsen <mingfangsen@huawei.com>, Guiyao <guiyao@huawei.com>,
	zhangsaisai <zhangsaisai@huawei.com>,
	"wubo (T)" <wubo40@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] brd: check and limit max_part par
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 06:58:58 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200120225858.GB19571@ming.t460p> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ce5823ea-2183-90df-05b0-c02d1f654be3@huawei.com>

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 09:14:50PM +0800, Zhiqiang Liu wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2020/1/15 10:27, Ming Lei wrote:
> 
> > 
> >>  MODULE_PARM_DESC(rd_nr, "Maximum number of brd devices");
> >>
> >>  unsigned long rd_size = CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RAM_SIZE;
> >>  module_param(rd_size, ulong, 0444);
> >>  MODULE_PARM_DESC(rd_size, "Size of each RAM disk in kbytes.");
> >>
> >> -static int max_part = 1;
> >> -module_param(max_part, int, 0444);
> >> +static unsigned int max_part = 1;
> >> +module_param(max_part, uint, 0444);
> > 
> > The above change isn't needed.
> Thanks for your suggestion.
> I will remove that in v4 patch.
> > 
> >>  MODULE_PARM_DESC(max_part, "Num Minors to reserve between devices");
> >>
> >>  MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> >> @@ -393,7 +393,14 @@ static struct brd_device *brd_alloc(int i)
> >>  	if (!disk)
> >>  		goto out_free_queue;
> >>  	disk->major		= RAMDISK_MAJOR;
> >> -	disk->first_minor	= i * max_part;
> >> +	/*
> >> +	 * Clear .minors when running out of consecutive minor space since
> >> +	 * GENHD_FL_EXT_DEVT is set, and we can allocate from extended devt.
> >> +	 */
> >> +	if ((i * disk->minors) & ~MINORMASK)
> >> +		disk->minors = 0;
> >> +	else
> >> +		disk->first_minor = i * disk->minors;
> > 
> > The above looks a bit ugly, one nice way could be to change in
> > brd_alloc():
> > 
> > 	disk = brd->brd_disk = alloc_disk(((i * max_part) & ~MINORMASK) ?
> > 		0 : max_part);
> 
> I will change it as your suggestion.
> 
> > 
> >>  	disk->fops		= &brd_fops;
> >>  	disk->private_data	= brd;
> >>  	disk->queue		= brd->brd_queue;
> >> @@ -468,6 +475,21 @@ static struct kobject *brd_probe(dev_t dev, int *part, void *data)
> >>  	return kobj;
> >>  }
> >>
> >> +static inline void brd_check_and_reset_par(void)
> >> +{
> >> +	if (unlikely(!rd_nr))
> >> +		rd_nr = 1;
> > 
> > zero rd_nr should work as expected, given user can create dev file via
> > mknod, and brd_probe() will be called for populate brd disk/queue when
> > the disk file is opened.
> > 
> >> +static inline void brd_check_and_reset_par(void)
> >> +{
> >> +       if (unlikely(!rd_nr))
> >> +               rd_nr = 1;
> >> +
> >> +       if (unlikely(!max_part))
> >> +               max_part = 1;
> > 
> > Another limit is that 'max_part' needs to be divided exactly by (1U <<
> > MINORBITS), something like:
> > 
> > 	max_part = 1UL << fls(max_part)
> 
> Do we have to limit that 'max_part' needs to be divided exactly by (1U <<
> > MINORBITS)? As your suggestion, the i * max_part is larger than MINORMASK,
> we can allocate from extended devt.

Exact dividing is for reserving same minors for all disks with
RAMDISK_MAJOR, otherwise there is still chance to get same dev_t when
adding partitions.

Extended devt is for covering more disks, not related with 'max_part'.


Thanks,
Ming


  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-20 22:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-01-14 11:56 [PATCH V3] brd: check and limit max_part par Zhiqiang Liu
2020-01-15  2:27 ` Ming Lei
2020-01-20 13:14   ` Zhiqiang Liu
2020-01-20 22:58     ` Ming Lei [this message]
2020-01-21  1:44       ` Zhiqiang Liu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200120225858.GB19571@ming.t460p \
    --to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=guiyao@huawei.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=liuzhiqiang26@huawei.com \
    --cc=mingfangsen@huawei.com \
    --cc=wubo40@huawei.com \
    --cc=zhangsaisai@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox