Re: [PATCH 03/26] loop: stop using loop_reconfigure_limits in __loop_clr_fd
- To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
- Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>, Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>, Philipp Reisner <philipp.reisner@linbit.com>, Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@linbit.com>, Christoph Böhmwalder <christoph.boehmwalder@linbit.com>, Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>, Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>, Alasdair Kergon <agk@redhat.com>, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@kernel.org>, Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>, Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>, Vineeth Vijayan <vneethv@linux.ibm.com>, "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com, nbd@other.debian.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux.dev, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, nvdimm@lists.linux.dev, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/26] loop: stop using loop_reconfigure_limits in __loop_clr_fd
- From: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:53:19 +0900
- Message-id: <[🔎] ca5a3441-768a-4331-a1c2-a4bdadf2f150@kernel.org>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20240611051929.513387-4-hch@lst.de>
- References: <[🔎] 20240611051929.513387-1-hch@lst.de> <[🔎] 20240611051929.513387-4-hch@lst.de>
On 6/11/24 2:19 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> __loop_clr_fd wants to clear all settings on the device. Prepare for
> moving more settings into the block limits by open coding
> loop_reconfigure_limits.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> ---
> drivers/block/loop.c | 10 +++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
> index 93780f41646b75..93a49c40a31a71 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/loop.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
> @@ -1133,6 +1133,7 @@ static int loop_configure(struct loop_device *lo, blk_mode_t mode,
>
> static void __loop_clr_fd(struct loop_device *lo, bool release)
> {
> + struct queue_limits lim;
> struct file *filp;
> gfp_t gfp = lo->old_gfp_mask;
>
> @@ -1156,7 +1157,14 @@ static void __loop_clr_fd(struct loop_device *lo, bool release)
> lo->lo_offset = 0;
> lo->lo_sizelimit = 0;
> memset(lo->lo_file_name, 0, LO_NAME_SIZE);
> - loop_reconfigure_limits(lo, 512, false);
> +
> + /* reset the block size to the default */
> + lim = queue_limits_start_update(lo->lo_queue);
> + lim.logical_block_size = 512;
Nit: SECTOR_SIZE ? maybe ?
> + lim.physical_block_size = 512;
> + lim.io_min = 512;
> + queue_limits_commit_update(lo->lo_queue, &lim);
> +
> invalidate_disk(lo->lo_disk);
> loop_sysfs_exit(lo);
> /* let user-space know about this change */
Otherwise, looks OK to me.
Reviewed-by: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
--
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research
Reply to: