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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4B0AC7EE2C for ; Wed, 3 May 2023 18:49:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229830AbjECStF (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 May 2023 14:49:05 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51388 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229705AbjECSs7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 May 2023 14:48:59 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f179.google.com (mail-pf1-f179.google.com [209.85.210.179]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 965291FCF; Wed, 3 May 2023 11:48:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-f179.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-63b4bf2d74aso3961667b3a.2; Wed, 03 May 2023 11:48:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1683139725; x=1685731725; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=XuZdnAT/CQoJVHT3dd2kMfmEP+YdLoqLBmiyeRwGCT0=; b=e8NdoRKfa1X2HkE8HBLHmECQjKIVBHYK7cjvDC65b30gG04OpJtvNYuqg5ckBI0Kva K8+HfazqajqCOUR1eaTu1ugL9ylRT+KTMZA+RB8ih/LgD/Z9++s2KUD1UxDtH8WhQrW3 MkWiqKjp4n9HGsz8wNWw4y4oNr0wMo/ETxxdZugNdw524z7BHsjpT8xrO3OFna+UIMQ6 Wstz1rmZqoyfqvGuSF9B9uuDxETqLY04iJ/m123b2pfA1sR3o0BI3ls50Bygej3QqTsU 9cCoI0ZvVu00DFVzVnR0j7hWB4F7IPc8G3x10xRNdhFBx6+u0WpIkvMcgX9OiQcii6xp tdqg== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDw0hjSvPL/2I0sGPuQJD9JhLSi5J9DEYPblcvTaRjbgZ5IMI1/8 zRy2+n44rsVEXdoYkzNZ2IQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ5F6Az63900qigR1giHZvAPngXjFjcguLu9ABSQRGHDFzMdwXwdp/xGRc4SUkbW0gFEAodEnw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:258e:b0:ef:b02a:b35b with SMTP id k14-20020a056a20258e00b000efb02ab35bmr28209835pzd.0.1683139724862; Wed, 03 May 2023 11:48:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2620:15c:211:201:c683:a90b:5f41:5878? ([2620:15c:211:201:c683:a90b:5f41:5878]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b20-20020a056a0002d400b006348cb791f4sm23919397pft.192.2023.05.03.11.48.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 03 May 2023 11:48:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <81ce524d-6186-e016-f597-153d214036bf@acm.org> Date: Wed, 3 May 2023 11:48:41 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 14/16] scsi: sd: Add WRITE_ATOMIC_16 support Content-Language: en-US To: John Garry , axboe@kernel.dk, kbusch@kernel.org, hch@lst.de, sagi@grimberg.me, martin.petersen@oracle.com, djwong@kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, dchinner@redhat.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, paul@paul-moore.com, jmorris@namei.org, serge@hallyn.com References: <20230503183821.1473305-1-john.g.garry@oracle.com> <20230503183821.1473305-15-john.g.garry@oracle.com> From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: <20230503183821.1473305-15-john.g.garry@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On 5/3/23 11:38, John Garry wrote: > +static blk_status_t sd_setup_atomic_cmnd(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd, > + sector_t lba, unsigned int nr_blocks, > + unsigned char flags) > +{ > + cmd->cmd_len = 16; > + cmd->cmnd[0] = WRITE_ATOMIC_16; > + cmd->cmnd[1] = flags; > + put_unaligned_be64(lba, &cmd->cmnd[2]); > + cmd->cmnd[10] = 0; > + cmd->cmnd[11] = 0; > + put_unaligned_be16(nr_blocks, &cmd->cmnd[12]); > + cmd->cmnd[14] = 0; > + cmd->cmnd[15] = 0; > + > + return BLK_STS_OK; > +} A single space in front of the assignment operator please. > + > static blk_status_t sd_setup_read_write_cmnd(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd) > { > struct request *rq = scsi_cmd_to_rq(cmd); > @@ -1149,6 +1166,7 @@ static blk_status_t sd_setup_read_write_cmnd(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd) > unsigned int nr_blocks = sectors_to_logical(sdp, blk_rq_sectors(rq)); > unsigned int mask = logical_to_sectors(sdp, 1) - 1; > bool write = rq_data_dir(rq) == WRITE; > + bool atomic_write = !!(rq->cmd_flags & REQ_ATOMIC) && write; Isn't the !! superfluous in the above expression? I have not yet seen any other kernel code where a flag test is used in a boolean expression and where !! occurs in front of the flag test. Thanks, Bart.