On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 03:19:11PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > Hi! > > On Mon 05-02-24 12:55:18, Christian Brauner wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 02:26:17PM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote: > > > Hey Christoph, > > > Hey Jan, > > > Hey Jens, > > > > > > This opens block devices as files. Instead of introducing a separate > > > indirection into bdev_open_by_*() vis struct bdev_handle we can just > > > make bdev_file_open_by_*() return a struct file. Opening and closing a > > > block device from setup_bdev_super() and in all other places just > > > becomes equivalent to opening and closing a file. > > > > > > This has held up in xfstests and in blktests so far and it seems stable > > > and clean. The equivalence of opening and closing block devices to > > > regular files is a win in and of itself imho. Added to that is the > > > ability to do away with struct bdev_handle completely and make various > > > low-level helpers private to the block layer. > > > > > > All places were we currently stash a struct bdev_handle we just stash a > > > file and use an accessor such as file_bdev() akin to I_BDEV() to get to > > > the block device. > > > > > > It's now also possible to use file->f_mapping as a replacement for > > > bdev->bd_inode->i_mapping and file->f_inode or file->f_mapping->host as > > > an alternative to bdev->bd_inode allowing us to significantly reduce or > > > even fully remove bdev->bd_inode in follow-up patches. > > > > > > In addition, we could get rid of sb->s_bdev and various other places > > > that stash the block device directly and instead stash the block device > > > file. Again, this is follow-up work. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > Christian > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > > With all fixes applied I've moved this into vfs.super on vfs/vfs.git so > > this gets some exposure in -next asap. Please let me know if you have > > quarrels with that. > > No quarrels really. I went through the patches and all of them look fine to > me to feel free to add: > > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> > > I have just noticed that in "bdev: make struct bdev_handle private to the > block layer" in bdev_open() we are still leaking the handle in case of > error. This is however temporary (until the end of the series when we get > rid of handles altogether) so whatever. Can you double-check what's in vfs.super right now? I thought I fixed this up. I'll check too!
