On Sun, 14 Sep 2025 13:45:16 +0200, kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > On Sat, Sep 14, 2025 at 11:37:15AM +0800, alexjlzheng@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > From: Jinliang Zheng <alexjlzheng@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > iomap_folio_state marks the uptodate state in units of block_size, so > > it is better to check that pos and length are aligned with block_size. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jinliang Zheng <alexjlzheng@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > fs/iomap/buffered-io.c | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/fs/iomap/buffered-io.c b/fs/iomap/buffered-io.c > > index fd827398afd2..0c38333933c6 100644 > > --- a/fs/iomap/buffered-io.c > > +++ b/fs/iomap/buffered-io.c > > @@ -234,6 +234,9 @@ static void iomap_adjust_read_range(struct inode *inode, struct folio *folio, > > unsigned first = poff >> block_bits; > > unsigned last = (poff + plen - 1) >> block_bits; > > > > + WARN_ON(*pos & (block_size - 1)); > > + WARN_ON(length & (block_size - 1)); > Any reason you chose WARN_ON instead of WARN_ON_ONCE? I just think it's a fatal error that deserves attention every time it's triggered. > > I don't see WARN_ON being used in iomap/buffered-io.c. I'm not sure if there are any community guidelines for using these two macros. If there are, please let me know and I'll be happy to follow them as a guide. thanks, Jinliang Zheng. :) > -- > Pankaj
