On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 12:51:55AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 12:14:20PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > In the next few patches, we're going into introduce buffer targets that
> > are not block devices. Introduce block_device helpers so that the
> > compiler can check that we're not feeding an xfile object to something
> > expecting a block device.
>
> I don't see how these helpers allow the compiler to check anything.
> I also don't see any other good reason for the helpers, but maybe I'm
> just missing something.
Oh, right -- originally, this patch made struct xfs_buftarg do this:
struct xfs_buftarg {
dev_t bt_dev;
union {
struct block_device *bt_bdev;
struct xfile *bt_xfile;
};
struct dax_device *bt_daxdev;
Dereferencing bt_bdev/bt_xfile was controlled through a buftarg flag.
IOWs, it employed the tagged union pattern.
When bt_bdev_handle came about, I gave up on the tagged union and simply
added another pointer to struct xfs_buftarg. There aren't that many of
them floating around in the system, so the extra 8 bytes isn't a giant
drain on resources.
struct xfs_buftarg {
dev_t bt_dev;
struct bdev_handle *bt_bdev_handle;
struct block_device *bt_bdev;
struct dax_device *bt_daxdev;
struct xfile *bt_xfile;
Now we don't need these wrappers since we can't accidentally dereference
bt_xfile as a struct block_device. I'll drop this one.
--D
