From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A28E0C433DF for ; Fri, 15 May 2020 02:05:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50B6720671 for ; Fri, 15 May 2020 02:05:11 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 50B6720671 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 8BE9990000C; Thu, 14 May 2020 22:05:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 86FB18E0005; Thu, 14 May 2020 22:05:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 784B090000C; Thu, 14 May 2020 22:05:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0150.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.150]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6183D8E0005 for ; Thu, 14 May 2020 22:05:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin04.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 176AB3499 for ; Fri, 15 May 2020 02:05:10 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76817310780.04.cow34_2cfe545978443 X-HE-Tag: cow34_2cfe545978443 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4855 Received: from huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.190]) by imf09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 15 May 2020 02:05:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from DGGEMS411-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.58]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 88013B5C8678E9F93395; Fri, 15 May 2020 10:05:05 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.166.215.55) by DGGEMS411-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.211) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.487.0; Fri, 15 May 2020 10:05:04 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] clean up SECTOR related macros and sectors/pages conversions To: Minchan Kim , Nitin Gupta , "Sergey Senozhatsky" , Matthew Wilcox , Jens Axboe , Coly Li , Kent Overstreet , "Alasdair Kergon" , Mike Snitzer , linux-block , Andrew Morton , linux-mm , dm-devel , Song Liu , linux-raid , linux-kernel References: <20200507075100.1779-1-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> From: "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" Message-ID: <34fa4c00-9860-ca09-da4d-c5b20aad81b7@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 10:05:02 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200507075100.1779-1-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.166.215.55] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: Hi, all: It seems no one take care about these patches. But I think patch 1 is need. And the main discussion points of others is whether we should add sectors_to_npage()/npage_to_sectors() or keep PAGE_SECTORS_SHIFT. And which marco name do we prefer: PAGE_SECTORS vs SECTORS_PER_PAGE, PAGE_SECTORS_SHIFT vs SECTORS_PER_PAGE_SHIFT. Hi, Jens Axboe, Coly Li, Kent Overstreet,Alasdair Kergon. Mike Snitzer: Can you take a look at patch 1? On 2020/5/7 15:50, Zhen Lei wrote: > v1 --> v2: > As Matthew Wilcox's suggestion, add sectors_to_npage()/npage_to_sectors() > helpers to eliminate SECTORS_PER_PAGE_SHIFT, because it's quite hard to read. > In further, I also eliminated PAGE_SECTORS_SHIFT. > > I tried to eliminate all magic number "9" and "512", but it's too many, maybe > no one want to review it, so I gave up. In the process of searching, I found > the existing macro PAGE_SECTORS, it's equivalent to SECTORS_PER_PAGE. Because > PAGE_SECTORS was defined in include/linux/device-mapper.h, and SECTORS_PER_PAGE > was defined in drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h, so I discarded SECTORS_PER_PAGE, > althrough I prefer it so much. > > v1: > When I studied the code of mm/swap, I found "1 << (PAGE_SHIFT - 9)" appears > many times. So I try to clean up it. > > 1. Replace "1 << (PAGE_SHIFT - 9)" or similar with SECTORS_PER_PAGE > 2. Replace "PAGE_SHIFT - 9" with SECTORS_PER_PAGE_SHIFT > 3. Replace "9" with SECTOR_SHIFT > 4. Replace "512" with SECTOR_SIZE > > Zhen Lei (10): > block: move PAGE_SECTORS definition into > zram: abolish macro SECTORS_PER_PAGE > block: add sectors_to_npage()/npage_to_sectors() helpers > zram: abolish macro SECTORS_PER_PAGE_SHIFT > block: abolish macro PAGE_SECTORS_SHIFT > mm/swap: use npage_to_sectors() and PAGE_SECTORS to clean up code > block: use sectors_to_npage() and PAGE_SECTORS to clean up code > md: use sectors_to_npage() and npage_to_sectors() to clean up code > md: use existing definition RESYNC_SECTORS > md: use PAGE_SECTORS to clean up code > > block/blk-settings.c | 6 +++--- > block/partitions/core.c | 5 ++--- > drivers/block/brd.c | 7 ++----- > drivers/block/null_blk_main.c | 10 ++++------ > drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c | 8 ++++---- > drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h | 2 -- > drivers/md/bcache/util.h | 2 -- > drivers/md/dm-kcopyd.c | 2 +- > drivers/md/dm-table.c | 2 +- > drivers/md/md-bitmap.c | 16 ++++++++-------- > drivers/md/md.c | 6 +++--- > drivers/md/raid1.c | 10 +++++----- > drivers/md/raid10.c | 28 ++++++++++++++-------------- > drivers/md/raid5-cache.c | 11 +++++------ > drivers/md/raid5.c | 4 ++-- > include/linux/blkdev.h | 7 +++++-- > include/linux/device-mapper.h | 1 - > mm/page_io.c | 4 ++-- > mm/swapfile.c | 12 ++++++------ > 19 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 76 deletions(-) >