On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 07:02:33PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 04:39:40PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > I agree with David; we want something lower-level for swap to call into.
> > I'd suggest aops->swap_rw and an implementation might well look
> > something like:
> >
> > static ssize_t ext4_swap_rw(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter)
> > {
> > return iomap_dio_rw(iocb, iter, &ext4_iomap_ops, NULL, 0);
> > }
>
> Yes, that might make sense and would also replace the awkward IOCB_SWAP
> flag for the write side.
>
> For file systems like ext4 and xfs that have an in-memory block mapping
> tree this would be way better than the current version and also support
> swap on say multi-device file systems properly. We'd just need to be
> careful to read the extent information in at extent_activate time,
> by doing xfs_iread_extents for XFS or the equivalents in other file
> systems.
You'd still want to walk the extent map at activation time to reject
swapfiles with holes, shared extents, etc., right?
--D
