On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 12:50:28PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 06:48:33AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 05:43:37PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Introduce an uncached read function so that userspace can handle them in > > > the same way as the kernel. This also eliminates the need for some of > > > the libxfs_purgebuf calls (and two trips into the cache code). > > > > > > Refactor the get/read uncached buffer functions to hide the details of > > > uncached buffer-ism in rdwr.c. > > > > Split this into one patch adding the functionality to libxfs and > > one each to convert db and copy over with a good rationale for the > > switch in each case? > > Both programs use the uncached read for the same purpose, which is to > read the superblock without polluting the buffer cache when we haven't > yet established the filesystem sector size. HAH nope, despite the very similiar code, they do it for different reasons. Separate patches it is. --D > The only reason why repair doesn't need patching is that reaches into > the buffer cache internals to call lseek and read by hand. I guess that > should be fixed, separately. > > --D
