On Thu 29-12-22 06:10:26, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > mpage_writepages doesn't do any of the page locking itself, so remove > and outdated comment on the locking pattern there. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Looks good. Feel free to add: Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> Honza > --- > fs/mpage.c | 8 -------- > 1 file changed, 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/mpage.c b/fs/mpage.c > index 0f8ae954a57903..910cfe8a60d2e4 100644 > --- a/fs/mpage.c > +++ b/fs/mpage.c > @@ -641,14 +641,6 @@ static int __mpage_writepage(struct page *page, struct writeback_control *wbc, > * > * This is a library function, which implements the writepages() > * address_space_operation. > - * > - * If a page is already under I/O, generic_writepages() skips it, even > - * if it's dirty. This is desirable behaviour for memory-cleaning writeback, > - * but it is INCORRECT for data-integrity system calls such as fsync(). fsync() > - * and msync() need to guarantee that all the data which was dirty at the time > - * the call was made get new I/O started against them. If wbc->sync_mode is > - * WB_SYNC_ALL then we were called for data integrity and we must wait for > - * existing IO to complete. > */ > int > mpage_writepages(struct address_space *mapping, > -- > 2.35.1 > -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR
