On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Paul Bolle wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 10:02 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
And these popped up in v3.14-rc1 on 32 bit x86. This patch makes these
warnings go away. Compile tested only (on 32 and 64 bit x86).
Review is appreciated, because the code I'm touching here is far from
obvious to me.
-------->8--------
From: Paul Bolle <pebo...@tiscali.nl>
These are false positives. A bit of staring at the code reveals that
"struct bio_vec bvprv" and "int first" operate in lockstep: if first is
1 bvprv isn't yet initialized and if first is 0 bvprv will be
initialized. But if we convert bvprv to a pointer and initialize it to
NULL we can do away with first. And it turns out the warning is gone if
we do that. So that appears to be enough to help GCC understand the
flow of this code.
That's pretty much how it was done before the bio_vec iterators were
merged, but I think there's a problem with this approach for this patch
(see below).
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <pebo...@tiscali.nl>
---
drivers/block/nvme-core.c | 10 ++++------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/block/nvme-core.c b/drivers/block/nvme-core.c
index 51824d1..f9fb28b 100644
--- a/drivers/block/nvme-core.c
+++ b/drivers/block/nvme-core.c
@@ -495,11 +495,10 @@ static int nvme_split_and_submit(struct bio *bio, struct
nvme_queue *nvmeq,
static int nvme_map_bio(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, struct nvme_iod *iod,
struct bio *bio, enum dma_data_direction dma_dir, int psegs)
{
- struct bio_vec bvec, bvprv;
+ struct bio_vec bvec, *bvprv = NULL;
struct bvec_iter iter;
struct scatterlist *sg = NULL;
int length = 0, nsegs = 0, split_len = bio->bi_iter.bi_size;
- int first = 1;
if (nvmeq->dev->stripe_size)
split_len = nvmeq->dev->stripe_size -
@@ -508,10 +507,10 @@ static int nvme_map_bio(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, struct
nvme_iod *iod,
sg_init_table(iod->sg, psegs);
bio_for_each_segment(bvec, bio, iter) {
- if (!first && BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE(&bvprv, &bvec)) {
+ if (bvprv && BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE(bvprv, &bvec)) {
sg->length += bvec.bv_len;
} else {
- if (!first && BIOVEC_NOT_VIRT_MERGEABLE(&bvprv, &bvec))
+ if (bvprv && BIOVEC_NOT_VIRT_MERGEABLE(bvprv, &bvec))
return nvme_split_and_submit(bio, nvmeq,
length);
@@ -524,8 +523,7 @@ static int nvme_map_bio(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, struct
nvme_iod *iod,
if (split_len - length < bvec.bv_len)
return nvme_split_and_submit(bio, nvmeq, split_len);
length += bvec.bv_len;
- bvprv = bvec;
- first = 0;
+ bvprv = &bvec;
The address of bvec doesn't change, so bvprv is still going to point
to bvec on the next iteration instead of the previous bio_vec like we
want. When the next iteration gets to this comparison:
+ if (bvprv && BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE(bvprv, &bvec)) {
both bio_vec's have the same address.
}
iod->nents = nsegs;
sg_mark_end(sg);
--
1.8.5.3
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
