Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-4028-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20231215013931.3329455-1-linan666@huaweicloud.com>
 <20231215013931.3329455-2-linan666@huaweicloud.com> <CAPhsuW6VTvXy3L9CUhTrSC3+_-_n9FDVrtdzQ7SWWkukoQg13Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <be8d9147-4f7f-2fab-da2a-bb4cde46fd12@huaweicloud.com> <CAPhsuW6kv7FRB_1NoheiDqvmLmongiJ-ty9mYRNvFw3yecE_Ug@mail.gmail.com>
 <baf95bd0-0378-9b3a-9ab9-473baa35ebbc@huaweicloud.com>
In-Reply-To: <baf95bd0-0378-9b3a-9ab9-473baa35ebbc@huaweicloud.com>
From: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2023 08:04:50 -0800
Message-ID: <CAPhsuW61yzkH5Tp0ku37DBjnQzT81yJUx0F4bag4xdq1rX5gsA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] md: Fix overflow in is_mddev_idle
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: linan666@huaweicloud.com, axboe@kernel.dk, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, 
	yi.zhang@huawei.com, houtao1@huawei.com, yangerkun@huawei.com, 
	"yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 5:39=E2=80=AFPM Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> w=
rote:
>
[...]
> >
> > We only use  this for idle or not check, the behavior is OK (I think).
> > However, this logic is error prone.
> >
> > On 64-bit systems, there is a 4-byte hole behind sync_io. I think we ca=
n
> > just use it for atomic64_t so that we don't have to worry about overflo=
w.
>
> I'm not sure about this, because other than this ubsan warning, this
> overflow doesn't have any impact on functionality to me.

Fixing warnings for zero or low cost is always a good idea. It helps boost
the signal when UBSAN (and other debug features) detects real issues.

> If we care about this 'hole', there are lots of holes in gendisk, and
> can be avoiled, for example, moving 'sync_io' near  to 'node_id'.

The point was not "let's fill the hole", but "we can use atomic64_t
without extra memory cost". In general, I don't think we care too
much about holes in "struct gendisk".

Does this make sense?

Thanks,
Song