Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   "Kohada.Tetsuhiro@dc.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp" 
        <Kohada.Tetsuhiro@dc.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp>
To:     Sungjong Seo <sj1557.seo@samsung.com>
CC:     "Mori.Takahiro@ab.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp" 
        <Mori.Takahiro@ab.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp>,
        "Motai.Hirotaka@aj.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp" 
        <Motai.Hirotaka@aj.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp>,
        'Namjae Jeon' <namjae.jeon@samsung.com>,
        "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "'kohada.t2@gmail.com'" <kohada.t2@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] exfat: optimize dir-cache
Thread-Topic: [PATCH] exfat: optimize dir-cache
Thread-Index: AQHWLnxBxF+oxKbhEk+7qJPOsurCbai5sAsAgAHreCI=
Date:   Wed, 27 May 2020 08:00:40 +0000
Message-ID: <TY1PR01MB15784E70CEACDA05F688AE6790B10@TY1PR01MB1578.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CGME20200520075735epcas1p269372d222e25f3fd51b7979f5b7cdc61@epcas1p2.samsung.com>
        <20200520075641.32441-1-kohada.tetsuhiro@dc.mitsubishielectric.co.jp>,<055a01d63306$82b13440$88139cc0$@samsung.com>
In-Reply-To: <055a01d63306$82b13440$88139cc0$@samsung.com>
Accept-Language: ja-JP, en-US
Content-Language: ja-JP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-2022-jp"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 04d5cf0d-2674-4d08-3b66-08d802140ca8
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 27 May 2020 08:00:40.6819
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: c5a75b62-4bff-4c96-a720-6621ce9978e5
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: zPnLxbzWWy97W3uMEymJMOHr/wauVJzBjMsIB+GaBjQWzncknXQwboHiRh/mDRQ7H8ndnbXLGKogMIpaNwOj8w==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: TY1PR01MB1706
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Thank you for your comment.=0A=
=0A=
 >> +    for (i =3D 0; i < es->num_bh; i++) {=0A=
 >> +            if (es->modified)=0A=
 >> +                    exfat_update_bh(es->sb, es->bh[i], sync);=0A=
 >=0A=
 > Overall, it looks good to me.=0A=
 > However, if "sync" is set, it looks better to return the result of exfat=
_update_bh().=0A=
 > Of course, a tiny modification for exfat_update_bh() is also required.=
=0A=
=0A=
 I thought the same, while creating this patch.=0A=
 However this patch has changed a lot and I didn't add any new error checki=
ng.=0A=
 (So, the same behavior will occur even if an error occurs)=0A=
=0A=
 >> +struct exfat_dentry *exfat_get_dentry_cached(=0A=
 >> +    struct exfat_entry_set_cache *es, int num) {=0A=
 >> +    int off =3D es->start_off + num * DENTRY_SIZE;=0A=
 >> +    struct buffer_head *bh =3D es->bh[EXFAT_B_TO_BLK(off, es->sb)];=0A=
 >> +    char *p =3D bh->b_data + EXFAT_BLK_OFFSET(off, es->sb);=0A=
 >=0A=
 > In order to prevent illegal accesses to bh and dentries, it would be bet=
ter to check validation for num and bh.=0A=
=0A=
 There is no new error checking for same reason as above.=0A=
=0A=
 I'll try to add error checking to this v2 patch.=0A=
 Or is it better to add error checking in another patch?=0A=
=0A=
BR=0A=
---=0A=
Kohada Tetsuhiro <Kohada.Tetsuhiro@dc.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp>=