On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 04:45:40PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
Sure would be nice to have a changelog explaining why we're doing this.
> Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c
> index 6bf120bb1a17..94df43dcae0b 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c
> @@ -139,6 +139,7 @@ xfs_destroy_ioend(
> for (bio = &ioend->io_inline_bio; bio; bio = next) {
> struct bio_vec *bvec;
> int i;
> + struct bvec_iter_all bia;
>
> /*
> * For the last bio, bi_private points to the ioend, so we
> @@ -150,7 +151,7 @@ xfs_destroy_ioend(
> next = bio->bi_private;
>
> /* walk each page on bio, ending page IO on them */
> - bio_for_each_segment_all(bvec, bio, i)
> + bio_for_each_segment_all_sp(bvec, bio, i, bia)
It's confusing that you're splitting the old bio_for_each_segment_all
into multipage and singlepage variants, but bio_for_each_segment_all
continues to exist?
Hmm, the new multipage variant aliases the name bio_for_each_segment_all,
so clearly the _all function's sematics have changed a bit, but its name
and signature haven't, which seems likely to trip up someone who didn't
notice the behavioral change.
Is it still valid to call bio_for_each_segment_all? I get the feeling
from this patchset that you're really supposed to decide whether you
want one page at a time or more than one page at a time and choose _sp
or _mp?
(And, seeing how this was the only patch sent to this list, the chances
are higher of someone missing out on these subtle changes...)
--D
> xfs_finish_page_writeback(inode, bvec, error);
>
> bio_put(bio);
> --
> 2.9.4
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
