On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 01:35:10PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 02:31:17PM +0100, Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote: > > > + * If the folio has buffers, the uptodate buffers are set dirty, to > > > + * preserve dirty-state coherency between the folio and the buffers. > > > + * It the folio does not have buffers then when they are later attached > > > > s/It the folio/If the folio > > > + * they will all be set dirty. > > Is it better to rephrase it slightly as follows: > > > > If the folio does not have buffers, they will all be set dirty when they > > are later attached. > > Yes, I like that better. Actually, how about: * If the folio has buffers, the uptodate buffers are set dirty, to * preserve dirty-state coherency between the folio and the buffers. * Buffers added to a dirty folio are created dirty. I considered deleting the sentence entirely as it's not actually related to what the function does; it's just a note about how the buffer cache behaves. That said, information about how buffer heds work is scant enough that I don't want to delete it.
