On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 07:34:53PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 06:32:37PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 07:19:59PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 05:23:39PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
> > > Using __ functions in structures in different modules feels odd to me.
> > > Why not just have iomap_set_page_dirty be a #define to this function now
> > > if you want to do this?
> > >
> > > Or take the __ off of the function name?
> > >
> > > Anyway, logic here is fine, but feels odd.
> >
> > heh, that was how I did it the first time. Then I thought that it was
> > better to follow Christoph's patch:
> >
> > static const struct address_space_operations adfs_aops = {
> > + .set_page_dirty = __set_page_dirty_buffers,
> > (etc)
>
> Eventually everything around set_page_dirty should be changed to operate
> on folios, and that will be a good time to come up with a sane
> naming scheme without introducing extra churn.
The way it currently looks in my tree ...
set_page_dirty(page) is a thin wrapper that calls folio_mark_dirty(folio).
folio_mark_dirty() calls a_ops->dirty_folio(mapping, folio) (which
returns bool).
__set_page_dirty_nobuffers() becomes filemap_dirty_folio()
__set_page_dirty_buffers() becomes block_dirty_folio()
__set_page_dirty_no_writeback() becomes dirty_folio_no_writeback()
Now I look at it, maybe that last should be nowb_dirty_folio().
