by Jeff Mahoney

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/17] staging: lustre: lloop: Fix build failure on ppc64

On 4/10/16 10:04 AM, James Simmons wrote:
>
>> This patch was shown not to work. I just haven't removed it from opensuse yet.
>
> Its been running in our production tree as well for some time. Guess that
> change is a noop. In any case we have been discussing redoing the lloop
> driver anyways. Just need to find the cycles.

I guess my memory was flakey and I was recalling the first comments in
LU-4000. The updated version should be ok.

-Jeff

>> --
>> Jeff Mahoney
>> (apologies for the top post -- from my mobile)
>>
>>> On Apr 10, 2016, at 9:13 AM, James Simmons <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Jeff Mahoney <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> On ppc64 with 64k pages, we get a build failure in lloop:
>>>
>>> drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/lloop.c:527:2:
>>> note: in expansion of macro 'CLASSERT'
>>> CLASSERT(PAGE_CACHE_SIZE < (1 << (sizeof(unsigned short) * 8)));
>>>
>>> There's no need to change the queue's logical block size. Even if it could
>>> accept a 64k value, that would result in any file system on top of it
>>> needing to also use 64k blocks. It'd be safe to set it to 4k, but there's
>>> no actual need for it. It's not used to split requests except for WRITE_SAME,
>>> which lloop doesn't implement anyway.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <[email protected]>
>>> Intel-bug-id: https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-4000
>>> Reviewed-on: http://review.whamcloud.com/7745
>>> Reviewed-by: Jinshan Xiong <[email protected]>
>>> Reviewed-by: Minh Diep <[email protected]>
>>> Reviewed-by: Oleg Drokin <[email protected]>
>>> Signed-off-by: James Simmons <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/lloop.c | 3 ---
>>> 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/lloop.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/lloop.c
>>> index b725fc1..f396753 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/lloop.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/lloop.c
>>> @@ -525,9 +525,6 @@ static int loop_set_fd(struct lloop_device *lo, struct file *unused,
>>> lo->lo_queue->queuedata = lo;
>>>
>>> /* queue parameters */
>>> - CLASSERT(PAGE_CACHE_SIZE < (1 << (sizeof(unsigned short) * 8)));
>>> - blk_queue_logical_block_size(lo->lo_queue,
>>> - (unsigned short)PAGE_CACHE_SIZE);
>>> blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(lo->lo_queue,
>>> LLOOP_MAX_SEGMENTS << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - 9));
>>> blk_queue_max_segments(lo->lo_queue, LLOOP_MAX_SEGMENTS);
>>> --
>>> 1.7.1
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

--
Jeff Mahoney
SUSE Labs

Attachments:

signature.asc (827.00 B)
OpenPGP digital signature

2016-04-12 04:18:59

by Greg KH

[permalink] [raw]

Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/17] staging: lustre: osc: fix race issues thanks to oap_lock

On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 09:13:24AM -0400, James Simmons wrote:
> From: Sebastien Buisson <[email protected]>
>
> Fix 'data race condition' defects found by Coverity version 6.5.0:
>
> Data race condition (MISSING_LOCK)
>
> Accessing variable without holding lock. Elsewhere,
> this variable is accessed with lock held.
>
> This patch is dedicated to code fragments involving oap_lock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastien Buisson <[email protected]>
> Intel-bug-id: https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-2744
> Reviewed-on: http://review.whamcloud.com/6572
> Reviewed-by: Oleg Drokin <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Andreas Dilger <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: James Simmons <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/osc/osc_cache.c | 8 ++++++++
> drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/osc/osc_io.c | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

This patch doesn't apply at all. Can you rebase the whole series and
resend them?

thanks,

greg k-h