On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 04:44:38AM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > @@ -3068,6 +3069,12 @@ static int submit_bh_wbc(int op, int op_flags, struct buffer_head *bh, > } > > submit_bio(bio); > +} > + > +static int submit_bh_wbc(int op, int op_flags, struct buffer_head *bh, > + enum rw_hint write_hint, struct writeback_control *wbc) > +{ > + __bh_submit(bh, op | op_flags, write_hint, wbc, end_bio_bh_io_sync); > return 0; > } > I believe this will break use cases where the file system sets bh->b_end_io and then calls submit_bh(), which then calls submit_bh_wbc(). That's because with this change, calls to submit_bh_wbc() --- include submit_bh() --- ignores bh->b_end_io and results in end_bio_bh_io_sync getting used. Filesystems that do this includes fs/ntfs, fs/resiserfs. In this case, that can probably be fixed by changing submit_bh() to pass in bh->b_end_io, or switching those users to use the new bh_submit() function to prevent these breakages. - Ted