On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 11:13:49AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> > static bool
> > iomap_ioend_can_merge(struct iomap_ioend *ioend, struct iomap_ioend *next)
> > {
> > + size_t size = iomap_ioend_extent_size(ioend);
> > +
>
> The function name is kind of misleading IMO because this may not
> necessarily reflect "extent size." Maybe something like
> _ioend_size_aligned() would be more accurate..?
Agreed. What also would be useful is a comment describing the
function and why io_size is not aligned.
> 1. It kind of feels like a landmine in an area where block alignment is
> typically expected. I wonder if a rename to something like io_bytes
> would help at all with that.
Fine with me.
> Another randomish idea might be to define a flag like
> IOMAP_F_EOF_TRIMMED for ioends that are trimmed to EOF. Then perhaps we
> could make an explicit decision not to grow or merge such ioends, and
> let the associated code use io_size as is.
I don't think such a branch is any cheaper than the rounding..
