Message ID | 20240719023431.3800647-2-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | blk-ioprio: remove per-disk structure | expand |
On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 10:34:29AM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote: > + /* > + * Make sure cpd/pd_alloc_fn and cpd/pd_free_fn in pairs, and policy > + * without pd_alloc_fn/pd_free_fn can't be activated. > + */ > if ((!pol->cpd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->cpd_free_fn) || > (!pol->pd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->pd_free_fn)) > goto err_unlock; > -- I know this is existing code, but can you fix up the incorrect indentation while you touch this: if ((!pol->cpd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->cpd_free_fn) || (!pol->pd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->pd_free_fn)) Otherwise looks good: Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Hi! 在 2024/07/19 13:29, Christoph Hellwig 写道: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 10:34:29AM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote: >> + /* >> + * Make sure cpd/pd_alloc_fn and cpd/pd_free_fn in pairs, and policy >> + * without pd_alloc_fn/pd_free_fn can't be activated. >> + */ >> if ((!pol->cpd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->cpd_free_fn) || >> (!pol->pd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->pd_free_fn)) >> goto err_unlock; >> -- > > I know this is existing code, but can you fix up the incorrect > indentation while you touch this: Yes, and thanks for the review. Kuai > > if ((!pol->cpd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->cpd_free_fn) || > (!pol->pd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->pd_free_fn)) > > Otherwise looks good: > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> > > . >
On 7/18/24 10:29 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 10:34:29AM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote: >> + /* >> + * Make sure cpd/pd_alloc_fn and cpd/pd_free_fn in pairs, and policy >> + * without pd_alloc_fn/pd_free_fn can't be activated. >> + */ >> if ((!pol->cpd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->cpd_free_fn) || >> (!pol->pd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->pd_free_fn)) >> goto err_unlock; >> -- > > I know this is existing code, but can you fix up the incorrect > indentation while you touch this: > > if ((!pol->cpd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->cpd_free_fn) || > (!pol->pd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->pd_free_fn)) Using xor (^) for booleans seems weird to me. Is there any preference in Linux kernel code whether to use ^ or != to check whether to booleans are different? Thanks, Bart.
Hi, 在 2024/07/20 0:25, Bart Van Assche 写道: > On 7/18/24 10:29 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 10:34:29AM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote: >>> + /* >>> + * Make sure cpd/pd_alloc_fn and cpd/pd_free_fn in pairs, and >>> policy >>> + * without pd_alloc_fn/pd_free_fn can't be activated. >>> + */ >>> if ((!pol->cpd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->cpd_free_fn) || >>> (!pol->pd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->pd_free_fn)) >>> goto err_unlock; >>> -- >> >> I know this is existing code, but can you fix up the incorrect >> indentation while you touch this: >> >> if ((!pol->cpd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->cpd_free_fn) || >> (!pol->pd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->pd_free_fn)) > > Using xor (^) for booleans seems weird to me. Is there any preference in > Linux kernel code whether to use ^ or != to check whether to booleans > are different? I don't know, but I feel more comfortable to use '!=' myself. Thanks, Kuai > > Thanks, > > Bart. > > . >
diff --git a/block/blk-cgroup.c b/block/blk-cgroup.c index 37e6cc91d576..dcd5e857650a 100644 --- a/block/blk-cgroup.c +++ b/block/blk-cgroup.c @@ -1554,6 +1554,14 @@ int blkcg_activate_policy(struct gendisk *disk, const struct blkcg_policy *pol) if (blkcg_policy_enabled(q, pol)) return 0; + /* + * Policy is allowed to be registered without pd_alloc_fn/pd_free_fn, + * for example, ioprio. Such policy will work on blkcg level, not disk + * level, and don't need to be activated. + */ + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!pol->pd_alloc_fn || !pol->pd_free_fn)) + return -EINVAL; + if (queue_is_mq(q)) blk_mq_freeze_queue(q); retry: @@ -1733,7 +1741,10 @@ int blkcg_policy_register(struct blkcg_policy *pol) goto err_unlock; } - /* Make sure cpd/pd_alloc_fn and cpd/pd_free_fn in pairs */ + /* + * Make sure cpd/pd_alloc_fn and cpd/pd_free_fn in pairs, and policy + * without pd_alloc_fn/pd_free_fn can't be activated. + */ if ((!pol->cpd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->cpd_free_fn) || (!pol->pd_alloc_fn ^ !pol->pd_free_fn)) goto err_unlock;