Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 12:01:52AM +0530, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
>> This patch converts mpage_journal_page_buffers() to use folio and also
>> removes the PAGE_SIZE assumption.
>
> Bit of an oversight on my part. I neglected to do this after Jan added
> it. Perils of parallel development ...
>
Yes, these got left overs because of the parallel series.
>> -static int ext4_journal_page_buffers(handle_t *handle, struct page *page,
>> - int len)
>> +static int ext4_journal_page_buffers(handle_t *handle, struct folio *folio,
>> + size_t len)
>
> Should this be called ext4_journal_folio_buffers?
Sure. Will make the change. Otherwise this patch looks good to you?
I also had a query regarding setting "len = size - folio_pos(folio)" in this patch.
Details of which I had pasted in the cover letter. Let me copy-paste
it here from the cover letter. Could you please take a look at it?
<copy-paste>
Also had a query w.r.t your change [1]. I couldn't understand this change diff
from [1]. Given if we are making the conversion to folio, then shouldn't we do
len = size - folio_pos(pos), instead of len = size & ~PAGE_MASK
Could you please tell if the current change in [1] is kept deliberately?
At other places you did make len as size - folio_pos(pos) which removes the
PAGE_SIZE assumption.
-static int mpage_submit_page(struct mpage_da_data *mpd, struct page *page)
+static int mpage_submit_folio(struct mpage_da_data *mpd, struct folio *folio)
{
- int len;
+ size_t len;
<...>
size = i_size_read(mpd->inode);
- if (page->index == size >> PAGE_SHIFT &&
+ len = folio_size(folio);
+ if (folio_pos(folio) + len > size &&
!ext4_verity_in_progress(mpd->inode))
len = size & ~PAGE_MASK;
- else
- len = PAGE_SIZE;
- err = ext4_bio_write_page(&mpd->io_submit, page, len);
+ err = ext4_bio_write_page(&mpd->io_submit, &folio->page, len);
if (!err)
mpd->wbc->nr_to_write--;
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ext4/20230324180129.1220691-7-willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Thanks for the quick review!
-ritesh
