On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 1:02 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 10:42:56AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > + while ((page = readahead_page(rac))) {
> > > + if (fuse_readpages_fill(&data, page) != 0)
> >
> > Shouldn't this unlock + put page on error?
>
> We're certainly inconsistent between the two error exits from
> fuse_readpages_fill(). But I think we can simplify the whole thing
> ... how does this look to you?
Nice, overall.
>
> - while ((page = readahead_page(rac))) {
> - if (fuse_readpages_fill(&data, page) != 0)
> + nr_pages = min(readahead_count(rac), fc->max_pages);
Missing fc->max_read clamp.
> + ia = fuse_io_alloc(NULL, nr_pages);
> + if (!ia)
> return;
> + ap = &ia->ap;
> + __readahead_batch(rac, ap->pages, nr_pages);
nr_pages = __readahead_batch(...)?
This will give consecutive pages, right?
Thanks,
Miklos
