On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Applied (in file->f_mapping variant; it is equal to bdev->bd_mapping,
> but what's wrong with using ->f_mapping here?)
My only issue was that from a "mindless conversion" standpoint, most
of the other users had been changed to use inode->i_mapping.
I dunno why. I agree that file->f_mapping looks cleaner and is what
the code used to do. But maybe there was some reason why the other
fsync methods had been changed to use
filemap_write_and_wait_range(inode->i_mapping, start, end);
instead.
Linus
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
