On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 9:03 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 07:01:50AM +0530, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
> > @@ -214,7 +231,7 @@ struct iomap_readpage_ctx {
> > static int iomap_read_inline_data(const struct iomap_iter *iter,
> > struct folio *folio)
> > {
> > - struct iomap_page *iop;
> > + struct iomap_page __maybe_unused *iop;
>
> Ummm ... definitely unused, right?
>
Yes, I will fix it in the next rev. Will send it out soon.
> > const struct iomap *iomap = iomap_iter_srcmap(iter);
> > size_t size = i_size_read(iter->inode) - iomap->offset;
> > size_t poff = offset_in_page(iomap->offset);
> > @@ -240,7 +257,8 @@ static int iomap_read_inline_data(const struct iomap_iter *iter,
> > memcpy(addr, iomap->inline_data, size);
> > memset(addr + size, 0, PAGE_SIZE - poff - size);
> > kunmap_local(addr);
> > - iomap_set_range_uptodate(folio, iop, offset, PAGE_SIZE - poff);
> > + iomap_iop_set_range_uptodate(iter->inode, folio, offset,
> > + PAGE_SIZE - poff);
>
> Once you make this change, iop is set in this function, but never used.
> So you still want to call iomap_page_create() if offset > 0, but you
> can ignore the return value. And you don't need to call to_iomap_page().
>
> Or did I miss something elsewhere in this patch series?
No, I added __maybe_unused earlier to avoid W=1 warnings and then
forgot to fix it, before sending forgot to
fix that part of code.
-ritesh
