On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 4:22 AM Kairui Song <ryncsn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 3:14 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 03:04:50AM +0800, Kairui Song wrote: > > > From: Kairui Song <kasong@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > page_index is only for mixed usage of page cache and swap cache, for > > > pure page cache usage, the caller can just use page->index instead. > > > > > > It can't be a swap cache page here (being part of buffer head), > > > so just drop it, also convert it to use folio. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Kairui Song <kasong@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: linux-nilfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > --- > > > fs/nilfs2/bmap.c | 5 ++--- > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/nilfs2/bmap.c b/fs/nilfs2/bmap.c > > > index 383f0afa2cea..f4e5df0cd720 100644 > > > --- a/fs/nilfs2/bmap.c > > > +++ b/fs/nilfs2/bmap.c > > > @@ -453,9 +453,8 @@ __u64 nilfs_bmap_data_get_key(const struct nilfs_bmap *bmap, > > > struct buffer_head *pbh; > > > __u64 key; > > > > > > - key = page_index(bh->b_page) << (PAGE_SHIFT - > > > - bmap->b_inode->i_blkbits); > > > - for (pbh = page_buffers(bh->b_page); pbh != bh; pbh = pbh->b_this_page) > > > + key = bh->b_folio->index << (PAGE_SHIFT - bmap->b_inode->i_blkbits); > > > + for (pbh = folio_buffers(bh->b_folio); pbh != bh; pbh = pbh->b_this_page) > > > key++; > > > > > > return key; > > > > Why isn't this entire function simply: > > > > return bh->b_blocknr; > > > > Nice idea, I didn't plan for extra clean up and test for fs code, but > this might be OK to have, will check it. Wait a minute. This function returns a key that corresponds to the cache offset of the data block, not the disk block number. Why is returning to bh->b_blocknr an alternative ? Am I missing something? Ryusuke Konishi
