From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: don't use ->bd_inode to access the block device size Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 08:28:44 +0200 Message-ID: <20211014062844.GA25448@lst.de> References: <20211013051042.1065752-1-hch@lst.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211013051042.1065752-1-hch@lst.de> List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jens Axboe Cc: Coly Li , Mike Snitzer , Song Liu , David Sterba , Josef Bacik , Theodore Ts'o , OGAWA Hirofumi , Dave Kleikamp , Ryusuke Konishi , Anton Altaparmakov , Konstantin Komarov , Kees Cook , Phillip Lougher , Jan Kara , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com, linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, target-devel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 07:10:13AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > I wondered about adding a helper for looking at the size in byte units > to avoid the SECTOR_SHIFT shifts in various places. But given that > I could not come up with a good name and block devices fundamentally > work in sector size granularity I decided against that. So it seems like the biggest review feedback is that we should have such a helper. I think the bdev_size name is the worst as size does not imply a particular unit. bdev_nr_bytes is a little better but I'm not too happy. Any other suggestions or strong opinions?