[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH block/for-next v2 01/16] block: add a new helper to get inode from block_device
- To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 21:48:20 -0800
- Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxx, axboe@xxxxxxxxx, roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx, colyli@xxxxxxx, kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx, joern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx, richard@xxxxxx, vigneshr@xxxxxx, sth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, hoeppner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, hca@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, gor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, agordeev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, jejb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx, clm@xxxxxx, josef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dsterba@xxxxxxxx, viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, brauner@xxxxxxxxxx, nico@xxxxxxxxxxx, xiang@xxxxxxxxxx, chao@xxxxxxxxxx, tytso@xxxxxxx, adilger.kernel@xxxxxxxxx, agruenba@xxxxxxxxxx, jack@xxxxxxxx, konishi.ryusuke@xxxxxxxxx, dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx, linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, min15.li@xxxxxxxxxxx, dlemoal@xxxxxxxxxx, willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hare@xxxxxxx, p.raghav@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-block@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-bcache@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mtd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-bcachefs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-erofs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, gfs2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-nilfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, yi.zhang@xxxxxxxxxx, yangerkun@xxxxxxxxxx, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 05:49:19 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 09:35:56AM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
> Thanks for the advice! In case I'm understanding correctly, do you mean
> that all other fs/drivers that is using pages versions can safely switch
> to folio versions now?
If you never allocate a high-order folio pages are identical to folios.
So yes, we can do folio based interfaces only, and also use that as
an opportunity to convert over the callers.
> By the way, my orginal idea was trying to add a new field 'bd_flags'
> in block_devcie, and then add a new bit so that bio_check_ro() will
> only warn once for each partition. Now that this patchset will be quite
> complex, I'll add a new bool field 'bd_ro_warned' to fix the above
> problem first, and then add 'bd_flags' once this patchset is done.
Yes, please do a minimal version if you can find space where the
rmw cycles don't cause damage to neighbouring fields. Or just leave
the current set of warnings in if it's too hard.
|