From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 16:56:46 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Jerome Glisse Cc: lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] Killing reliance on struct page->mapping Message-ID: <20180131165646.GI29051@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20180130004347.GD4526@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20180130004347.GD4526@redhat.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 07:43:48PM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote: > I started a patchset about $TOPIC a while ago, right now i am working on other > thing but i hope to have an RFC for $TOPIC before LSF/MM and thus would like a > slot during common track to talk about it as it impacts FS, BLOCK and MM (i am > assuming their will be common track). > > Idea is that mapping (struct address_space) is available in virtualy all the > places where it is needed and that their should be no reasons to depend only on > struct page->mapping field. My patchset basicly add mapping to a bunch of vfs > callback (struct address_space_operations) where it is missing, changing call > site. Then i do an individual patch per filesystem to leverage the new argument > instead on struct page. Oh? What about the places like fs/coda? Or block devices, for that matter... You can't count upon file->f_mapping->host == file_inode(file). From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 16:56:46 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Jerome Glisse Cc: lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] Killing reliance on struct page->mapping Message-ID: <20180131165646.GI29051@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20180130004347.GD4526@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180130004347.GD4526@redhat.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 07:43:48PM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote: > I started a patchset about $TOPIC a while ago, right now i am working on other > thing but i hope to have an RFC for $TOPIC before LSF/MM and thus would like a > slot during common track to talk about it as it impacts FS, BLOCK and MM (i am > assuming their will be common track). > > Idea is that mapping (struct address_space) is available in virtualy all the > places where it is needed and that their should be no reasons to depend only on > struct page->mapping field. My patchset basicly add mapping to a bunch of vfs > callback (struct address_space_operations) where it is missing, changing call > site. Then i do an individual patch per filesystem to leverage the new argument > instead on struct page. Oh? What about the places like fs/coda? Or block devices, for that matter... You can't count upon file->f_mapping->host == file_inode(file). -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org