linux-mtd.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dedekind1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] UBI: Implement bitrot checking
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2015 18:31:01 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150412183101.2cbcde3f@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <552A99F0.9040701@nod.at>

On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 18:14:40 +0200
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> wrote:

> > IMHO the following code chunk, starting here:
> > 
> >> +			wl_wrk = prepare_erase_work(e, -1, -1, 1);
> >> +			if (IS_ERR(wl_wrk)) {
> >> +				err = PTR_ERR(wl_wrk);
> >> +				goto out;
> >> +			}
> >> +
> >> +			__schedule_ubi_work(ubi, wl_wrk);
> > 
> > and ending here ^, could be placed in an helper function
> > (re_erase_peb ?)
> 
> As long we have only one user of that pattern I'd keep it as is.
> We have in UBI already a gazillion helper functions.

Okay, then maybe you should comment what you're doing here: erase an
already erased PEB where bitflips have occured.

> 
> >> +			err = 0;
> >> +		}
> >> +		/*
> >> +		 * e is target of a move operation, all we can do is kicking
> >> +		 * wear leveling such that we can catch it later or wear
> >> +		 * leveling itself scrubbs the PEB.
> >> +		 */
> >> +		else if (ubi->move_to == e || ubi->move_from == e) {
> >> +			spin_unlock(&ubi->wl_lock);
> >> +
> >> +			err = ensure_wear_leveling(ubi, 1);
> >> +		}
> >> +		/*
> >> +		 * e is member of a fastmap pool. We are not allowed to
> >> +		 * remove it from that pool as the on-flash fastmap data
> >> +		 * structure refers to it. Let's schedule a new fastmap write
> >> +		 * such that the said PEB can get released.
> >> +		 */
> >> +		else {
> >> +			ubi_schedule_fm_work(ubi);
> >> +			spin_unlock(&ubi->wl_lock);
> >> +
> >> +			err = 0;
> >> +		}
> > 
> > I'm nitpicking again, but I like to have a single place where spinlocks
> > are locked and unlocked, so here is a rework suggestion for the code
> > inside the 'if (err == UBI_IO_BITFLIPS)' statement:
> 
> A single lock/unlock place is nice but in this case the whole logic fits
> into a single page on screen. "do_this" and "do_that" variables don't make
> the code more readable IMHO.
> But as with all nitpicks it is a matter of taste and we could waste multiple
> days on such things.

Isn't that the whole point of code reviews :-P ?


-- 
Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

  reply	other threads:[~2015-04-12 16:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-29 12:13 UBI: Bitrot checking Richard Weinberger
2015-03-29 12:13 ` [PATCH 1/4] UBI: Introduce ubi_schedule_fm_work() Richard Weinberger
2015-03-29 12:13 ` [PATCH 2/4] UBI: Introduce prepare_erase_work() Richard Weinberger
2015-03-29 12:13 ` [PATCH 3/4] UBI: Introduce in_pq() Richard Weinberger
2015-03-29 12:13 ` [PATCH 4/4] UBI: Implement bitrot checking Richard Weinberger
2015-04-02 17:34   ` Andrea Scian
2015-04-02 17:54     ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-02 19:19       ` Andrea Scian
2015-04-08 10:34         ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-08 21:02           ` Andrea Scian
2015-04-08 11:48   ` David Oberhollenzer
2015-04-12 14:12   ` Boris Brezillon
2015-04-12 16:09     ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-12 16:43       ` Boris Brezillon
2015-04-12 16:55         ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-12 20:42           ` [PATCH 4/4] UBI: Implement bitrot checking (linux-mtd Digest, Vol 145, Issue 24) Andrea Scian
2015-04-12 21:01             ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-12 21:30               ` Boris Brezillon
2015-04-12 21:37                 ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-12 21:33               ` Andrea Scian
2015-04-12 21:42                 ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-13 17:17                   ` linux-mtd digest emails (was Re: [PATCH 4/4] UBI: Implement bitrot checking) Brian Norris
2015-04-12 15:14   ` [PATCH 4/4] UBI: Implement bitrot checking Boris Brezillon
2015-04-12 16:14     ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-12 16:31       ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
2015-04-12 16:32         ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-12 17:01   ` Boris Brezillon
2015-04-12 17:09     ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-12 19:20       ` Boris Brezillon
2015-04-12 19:53         ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-12 21:24           ` Boris Brezillon
2015-04-12 21:34             ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-13  3:36               ` nick
2015-04-12 17:36     ` Richard Weinberger
     [not found] <mailman.38750.1427638218.22890.linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
     [not found] <mailman.40253.1428858576.22890.linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>

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=20150412183101.2cbcde3f@bbrezillon \
    --to=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
    --cc=dedekind1@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=richard@nod.at \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).