On 2/18/22 12:22 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 12:14:50PM -0800, Stefan Roesch wrote: >> >> >> On 2/18/22 12:13 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >>> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 12:08:27PM -0800, Stefan Roesch wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2/18/22 11:59 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 11:57:27AM -0800, Stefan Roesch wrote: >>>>>> This adds a flags parameter to the __begin_write_begin_int() function. >>>>>> This allows to pass flags down the stack. >>>>> >>>>> Still no. >>>> >>>> Currently block_begin_write_cache is expecting an aop_flag. Are you asking to >>> >>> There is no function by that name in Linus' tree. >>> >>>> first have a patch that replaces the existing aop_flag parameter with the gfp_t? >>>> and then modify this patch to directly use gfp flags? >> >> s/block_begin_write_cache/block_write_begin/ > > I don't think there's any need to change the arguments to > block_write_begin(). That's widely used and I don't think changing > all the users is worth it. You don't seem to call it anywhere in this > patch set. > > But having block_write_begin() translate the aop flags into gfp > and fgp flags, yes. It can call pagecache_get_page() instead of > grab_cache_page_write_begin(). And then you don't need to change > grab_cache_page_write_begin() at all. That would still require adding a new aop flag (AOP_FLAG_NOWAIT). You are ok with that?
