Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <df995d93-4b31-fa61-a7ae-db33fd058412@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 12 Apr 2023 17:31:03 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.9.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] writeback: fix call of incorrect macro
To:     Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lvc-project@linuxtesting.org
References: <20230119104443.3002-1-korotkov.maxim.s@gmail.com>
 <20230126135258.zpvyfxc2ffhzzsnx@quack3>
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Maxim Korotkov <korotkov.maxim.s@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230126135258.zpvyfxc2ffhzzsnx@quack3>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi,
Will this patch be applied or rejected?
best regards, Max

On 26.01.2023 16:52, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 19-01-23 13:44:43, Maxim Korotkov wrote:
>>   the variable 'history' is of type u16, it may be an error
>>   that the hweight32 macro was used for it
>>   I guess macro hweight16 should be used
>>
>> Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with SVACE.
>>
>> Fixes: 2a81490811d0 ("writeback: implement foreign cgroup inode detection")
>> Signed-off-by: Maxim Korotkov <korotkov.maxim.s@gmail.com>
> 
> Looks good to me, although it is mostly a theoretical issue - I don't see
> how hweight32 could do any harm here. Anyway, feel free to add:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> 
> 								Honza
> 
>> ---
>>   fs/fs-writeback.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
>> index 6fba5a52127b..fc16123b2405 100644
>> --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
>> +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
>> @@ -829,7 +829,7 @@ void wbc_detach_inode(struct writeback_control *wbc)
>>   		 * is okay.  The main goal is avoiding keeping an inode on
>>   		 * the wrong wb for an extended period of time.
>>   		 */
>> -		if (hweight32(history) > WB_FRN_HIST_THR_SLOTS)
>> +		if (hweight16(history) > WB_FRN_HIST_THR_SLOTS)
>>   			inode_switch_wbs(inode, max_id);
>>   	}
>>   
>> -- 
>> 2.37.2
>>