From: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@meta.com>
Cc: <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>, <hch@lst.de>,
<linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>, Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] block: always allocate integrity buffer
Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 18:31:33 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <yq1msbot6ox.fsf@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250507191424.2436350-1-kbusch@meta.com> (Keith Busch's message of "Wed, 7 May 2025 12:14:24 -0700")
Keith,
> + if (bio_op(bio) == REQ_OP_READ && !bio->bi_status &&
> + bip->bip_flags & BIP_CHECK_GUARD) {
> - if (bio_data_dir(bio) == WRITE)
> + if (bio_data_dir(bio) == WRITE && bid->bip.bip_flags & BIP_CHECK_GUARD)
> blk_integrity_generate(bio);
I know that we can't have one without the other currently but there's
some cognitive PI dissonance wrt. keying off BIP_CHECK_GUARD only.
Maybe worth considering:
#define BIP_CHECK_FLAGS (BIP_CHECK_GUARD | BIP_CHECK_REFTAG | BIP_CHECK_APPTAG)
and validating against that? Or a bip_should_check() wrapper.
Not a biggie, it just trips me up when we encode implementation-specific
assumptions.
Anyway. It's probably OK.
Reviewed-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
--
Martin K. Petersen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-07 22:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-07 19:14 [PATCHv2] block: always allocate integrity buffer Keith Busch
2025-05-07 22:31 ` Martin K. Petersen [this message]
2025-05-08 5:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-05-08 5:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-05-08 16:14 ` Keith Busch
2025-05-08 16:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=yq1msbot6ox.fsf@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com \
--to=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=kbusch@meta.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
/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