Re: [PATCH 3/8] btrfs: pass a physical address to btrfs_repair_io_failure

[Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>]

在 2025/4/9 20:40, Christoph Hellwig 写道:
> This avoid stepping into bvec internals or complicated folio to
> page offset calculations.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> ---
>   fs/btrfs/bio.c     | 9 ++++-----
>   fs/btrfs/bio.h     | 3 +--
>   fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 7 ++++---
>   3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/bio.c b/fs/btrfs/bio.c
> index 8c2eee1f1878..10f31ee1e8c0 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/bio.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/bio.c
> @@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ static void btrfs_end_repair_bio(struct btrfs_bio *repair_bbio,
>   		btrfs_repair_io_failure(fs_info, btrfs_ino(inode),
>   				  repair_bbio->file_offset, fs_info->sectorsize,
>   				  repair_bbio->saved_iter.bi_sector << SECTOR_SHIFT,
> -				  page_folio(bv->bv_page), bv->bv_offset, mirror);
> +				  bvec_phys(bv), mirror);

Just one concern, this is highmem safe?

If it's highmem safe, I'm pretty happy to go the single physical address 
way instead of folio/page + offset.

That's way more convenient to handle block size < page size cases.

Thanks,
Qu