On 09/13/2018 10:15 AM, Chao Yu wrote:
On 2018/9/12 13:10, Chengguang Xu wrote:
Define a dummpy function of erofs_build_fault_attr() when macro
CONFIG_EROFS_FAULT_INJECTION is disabled, so that we don't have to
check the macro in calling place. Based on above adjustment,
do proper code cleanup for option parsing of fault_injection.
Signed-off-by: Chengguang Xu <cgxu...@gmx.com>
---
drivers/staging/erofs/super.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/erofs/super.c b/drivers/staging/erofs/super.c
index 1aec509c805f..14dbb6517b8d 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/erofs/super.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/erofs/super.c
@@ -144,18 +144,33 @@ char *erofs_fault_name[FAULT_MAX] = {
[FAULT_KMALLOC] = "kmalloc",
};
-static void erofs_build_fault_attr(struct erofs_sb_info *sbi,
- unsigned int rate)
+static int erofs_build_fault_attr(struct erofs_sb_info *sbi,
+ substring_t *args)
{
struct erofs_fault_info *ffi = &sbi->fault_info;
+ int rate = 0;
+
+ if (args->from && match_int(args, &rate))
+ return -EINVAL;
if (rate) {
atomic_set(&ffi->inject_ops, 0);
ffi->inject_rate = rate;
ffi->inject_type = (1 << FAULT_MAX) - 1;
+ set_opt(sbi, FAULT_INJECTION);
} else {
memset(ffi, 0, sizeof(struct erofs_fault_info));
+ clear_opt(sbi, FAULT_INJECTION);
Hmmm, if user mounts/remounts image with -o fault_injection=0, user can not
check such info in anywhere, as we skip showing this option due to lack of
EROFS_MOUNT_FAULT_INJECTION bit. How about keeping this bit?
IIUC, the purpose of fault_injection=0 is for disabling fault injection
function,
so isn't it the same as default? Should we distinguish explicit setting
value 0 and default value 0?
Thanks,
Chengguang
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
