From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH block#for-2.6.31 2/3] block: set rq->resid_len to blk_rq_bytes() on issue Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 09:14:23 +0900 Message-ID: <4A0E055F.9000308@gmail.com> References: <4A0D86DB.9000203@kernel.org> <4A0D87D2.7090806@gmail.com> <20090515112901.84d4dd97.zaitcev@redhat.com> <4A0DE954.4020102@gmail.com> <20090515171645.7a92d46c.zaitcev@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090515171645.7a92d46c.zaitcev@redhat.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Pete Zaitcev Cc: Jens Axboe , James Bottomley , Boaz Harrosh , Linux Kernel , linux-scsi , IDE/ATA development list , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Borislav Petkov , Sergei Shtylyov , Eric Moore , "Darrick J. Wong" List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Hello, Pete Zaitcev wrote: >> So, I could have written >> >> if (cmd->act_len >= rq->resid_len) >> rq->resid_len = 0; >> else >> rq->resid_len -= cmd->act_len >> >> Instead I wrote >> >> rq->resid_len -= min(cmd->act_len, rq->resid_len); >> >> It's just capping the amount to be subtracted so that resid_len >> doesn't underflow. What is so wrong or bad style about that? > > Curse of the gifted, I guess. To use a subtraction instead of zero > this way looks like a pointless, even mischievous obfuscation to me. Ummm... I don't know. I prefer min/max over if/else when capping values. To me, it makes the intention clearer but you're the maintainer and don't like the style, so I'll update the patch so that it has the if/else clause. :-) > Also, we probably want a stack_dump or a printk when actual length > exceeds the requested length, don't we? If it ever happens, we > might be overwriting some I/O buffer somewhere. It depends on particular implementation. Transport overflow doesn't necessarily become actual buffer overflow depending on hardware and driver implementation. If you think the user needs to be warned about transport overflow, please go ahead and add a warning there. Thanks. -- tejun