Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 18 Jul 2022 23:25:46 +0530
From:   Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
To:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc:     linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] jbd2: Drop useless return value of submit_bh
Message-ID: <20220718175546.zqrtnsuf72dgpexn@riteshh-domain>
References: <cover.1655703466.git.ritesh.list@gmail.com>
 <57b9cb59e50dfdf68eef82ef38944fbceba4e585.1655703467.git.ritesh.list@gmail.com>
 <YrEhXYBeQz8kNuGo@casper.infradead.org>
 <20220704090144.hdj3fpaaqyj35yt3@riteshh-domain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220704090144.hdj3fpaaqyj35yt3@riteshh-domain>
Precedence: bulk

On 22/07/04 02:31PM, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> On 22/06/21 02:39AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 11:28:40AM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> > > @@ -1636,14 +1636,12 @@ static int jbd2_write_superblock(journal_t *journal, int write_flags)
> > >  		sb->s_checksum = jbd2_superblock_csum(journal, sb);
> > >  	get_bh(bh);
> > >  	bh->b_end_io = end_buffer_write_sync;
> > > -	ret = submit_bh(REQ_OP_WRITE, write_flags, bh);
> > > +	submit_bh(REQ_OP_WRITE, write_flags, bh);
> > >  	wait_on_buffer(bh);
> > >  	if (buffer_write_io_error(bh)) {
> > >  		clear_buffer_write_io_error(bh);
> > >  		set_buffer_uptodate(bh);
> > >  		ret = -EIO;
> > > -	}
> > > -	if (ret) {
> > >  		printk(KERN_ERR "JBD2: Error %d detected when updating "
> > >  		       "journal superblock for %s.\n", ret,
> > >  		       journal->j_devname);
> >
> > Maybe rephrase the error message?  And join it together to match the
> > current preferred style.
> >
> > 		printk(KERN_ERR "JBD2: I/O error when updating journal superblock for %s.\n",
> > 				journal->j_devname);
>
> Sure, I will update the printk message like above and send out a v3
> (since I haven't receieved any other comments so I think v3 should be good to be
> picked up now)


We were planning to send this patch series via ext4 tree.
But it seems this might conflict with the below mentioned patches sitting in
linux-next. So let me rebase my patches on top of these and maybe hold to this
series until the current set of changes land in linux tree to avoid any merge
conflicts later.
But either ways do let me know if you would like to take any other preferred
route. Since this is not critical, so I am fine with either ways you suggest.


-ritesh

author Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> Thu Jul 14 11:07:13 2022 -0700

fs/buffer: Combine two submit_bh() and ll_rw_block() arguments

Both submit_bh() and ll_rw_block() accept a request operation type and
request flags as their first two arguments. Micro-optimize these two
functions by combining these first two arguments into a single argument.
This patch does not change the behavior of any of the modified code.