On 18/3/30 10:17, Changwei Ge wrote: >>>> Since we assume caller has to pass either all NULL or all non-NULL, >>>> here we will only put bh internal allocated. Am I missing something? >>> Thanks for your review. >>> Yes, we will only put bh internally allocated. >>> If bh is reserved in advance, we will not put it and re-assign it to NULL. >>> >> So this branch won't have risk, right? > Sorry... I'm not sure if I understand you correctly. > This branch will be walked through when previous part of bhs[] faces a read > failure in order to put bh allocated in ocfs2_read_blocks(). > And we assume all bh should be NULL or non-NULL, if new_bh is set, the back > part > should also be put to release those buffer heads. > > If I made a mistake or misunderstand you, please let me know.
I'm saying that sb_getblk() will only be called if bh hasn't been allocated yet. That means if it fails, the bh to be put can be guaranteed internal allocated. Also I don't think the WARN check is necessary as this is common path and will bring additional cpu consumption. We can make it clear at comments of ocfs2_read_blocks() that either all NULL or non-NULL bhs is prerequisite for the caller. And then we make sure we won't put bh that is allocated outside. Thanks, Joseph _______________________________________________ Ocfs2-devel mailing list Ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
