On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 03:22:09PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 02:08:48PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> > Matthew, can you please always CC linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for any
> > patches that touch code under fs/btrfs? I've only noticed your folio
> > updates in this pull request. Some of the changes are plain API switch,
> > that's fine but I want to know about that, some changes seem to slightly
> > modify logic that I'd really like to review and there are several missed
> > opportunities to fix coding style. Thanks.
>
> I'm sorry, that's an unreasonable request. There's ~50 filesystems
> that use address_space_operations and cc'ing individual filesystems
> on VFS-wide changes isn't feaasible.
How many filesystems have you touched in the recent changes? I've
counted about 7 subsystems in commit 704528d895dd ("fs: Remove
->readpages address space operation"), the rest are VFS/MM changes or
individual filesystems in separate patches.
Examples of btrfs-only changes, there are more like that in the pull as
you probably know:
8e1dec8eb8b0 ("btrfs: Use folio_invalidate()").
895586eb6898 ("btrfs: Convert from invalidatepage to invalidate_folio")
...
You know you can slap a CC: linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx to the patch
tag and forget about it, is that unreasonable? No. If you're updating
the same filesystems repeatedly you can copy the CC list for all of
them.
