On 03/07/2017 02:30 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> On 03/06/2017 09:32 PM, Dave Jiang wrote:
>> Providing mechanism to clear poison list via the ndctl ND_CMD_CLEAR_ERROR
>> call. We will update the poison list and also the badblocks at region level
>> if the region is in dax mode or in pmem mode and not active.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[email protected]>
>> ---
>
> [...]
>
>> + if ((cmd != ND_CMD_CLEAR_ERROR) || !nvdimm_bus || !clear_err->cleared)
> ^~ Unnecessary parenthesis?
>
> [...]
>
>> +
>> + /* make sure clear_err range is within a SPA range */
>> + if (((clear_begin >= spa_begin) &&
>> + (clear_begin < (spa_end))) &&
>> + ((clear_end > spa_begin) &&
>> + (clear_end <= spa_end))) {
>
> Indentation looks a bit odd here and the superfluous parenthesis aren't
> improving the situation.
>
> [...]
I'll fix that.
>
>
>> + if (nd_btt || nd_pfn || nd_dax) {
>> + if (nd_btt)
>> + ndns = nd_btt->ndns;
>> + else if (nd_pfn)
>> + ndns = nd_pfn->ndns;
>> + else if (nd_dax)
>> + ndns = nd_dax->nd_pfn.ndns;
>> +
>> + if (!ndns)
>> + return 0;
>
> How can this (the !ndns case) ever happen?
So if nd_btt->ndns or nd_pfn->ndns or nd_dax->nd_pfn.ndns happens to be
NULL, then this case can happen. I don't know how likely that is to
happen however. The code was lifted from nvdimm_namespace_common_probe().
>
> And anyways isn't this sufficient, or am I missing something:
>
> if (nd_btt)
> ndns = nd_btt->ndns;
> else if (nd_pfn)
> ndns = nd_pfn->ndns;
> else if (nd_dax)
> ndns = nd_dax->nd_pfn.ndns;
> else
> ndns = to_ndns(dev);
>
>> + } else
>> + ndns = to_ndns(dev);
>> +
>
> Thanks,
> Johannes
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
