On 12.11.19 г. 2:43 ч., Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:34:52 -0800 ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>> From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> swap_activate() and swap_deactivate() have nothing to do with
>> address spaces. We want to eventually make the address space operations
>> dynamic to switch inode flags on the fly.
>
> What does this mean?
>
>> So to simplify this code as
>> well as properly track these operations we move these functions to the
>> file_operations vector.
>>
>> This has been tested with XFS but not NFS, f2fs, or btrfs.
>>
>> Also note f2fs and xfs have simple moves of their functions to
>> facilitate compilation. No functional changes are contained within
>> those functions.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> --- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
>> @@ -11002,6 +11002,8 @@ static const struct file_operations btrfs_dir_file_operations = {
>> #endif
>> .release = btrfs_release_file,
>> .fsync = btrfs_sync_file,
>> + .swap_activate = btrfs_swap_activate,
>> + .swap_deactivate = btrfs_swap_deactivate,
>> };
>
> Shouldn't this be btrfs_file_operations?
INdeed, having swap activate on a directory doesn't make much sense.
>
>
