Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] erofs: introduce erofs_xattr_iter_fixup_aligned() helper

[Gao Xiang]

Hi,

On 2023/5/18 10:45, Jingbo Xu wrote:
> Introduce erofs_xattr_iter_fixup_aligned() helper where
> it.ofs <= EROFS_BLKSIZ is mandatory.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>   fs/erofs/xattr.c | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------
>   1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/erofs/xattr.c b/fs/erofs/xattr.c
> index bbfe7ce170d2..b79be2a556ba 100644
> --- a/fs/erofs/xattr.c
> +++ b/fs/erofs/xattr.c
> @@ -29,6 +29,28 @@ struct xattr_iter {
>   	unsigned int ofs;
>   };
>   
> +static inline int erofs_xattr_iter_fixup(struct xattr_iter *it)
> +{
> +	if (it->ofs < it->sb->s_blocksize)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	it->blkaddr += erofs_blknr(it->sb, it->ofs);
> +	it->kaddr = erofs_read_metabuf(&it->buf, it->sb, it->blkaddr, EROFS_KMAP);

could we use a new buf interface to init_metabuf at once?

> +	if (IS_ERR(it->kaddr))
> +		return PTR_ERR(it->kaddr);
> +	it->ofs = erofs_blkoff(it->sb, it->ofs);
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int erofs_xattr_iter_fixup_aligned(struct xattr_iter *it)

Since we're doing cleanup, this name sounds confusing to me
since here the meaning is actually "we don't allow pos >
blksize", IOWs, any pos <= blksize is allowed here, so
'aligned' is not accurate.

Could we think out a better one?

Thanks,
Gao Xiang