From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF736C4332F for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 08:33:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230077AbiKUIdL (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2022 03:33:11 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:58986 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230059AbiKUIdI (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2022 03:33:08 -0500 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07A94DF31; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 00:33:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 72A3668C7B; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 09:33:03 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 09:33:03 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: David Howells Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, Marc Dionne , Matthew Wilcox , Theodore Ts'o , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] afs: Stop implementing ->writepage() Message-ID: <20221121083303.GB27500@lst.de> References: <20221121071704.GC23882@lst.de> <166876785552.222254.4403222906022558715.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <150667.1669019337@warthog.procyon.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <150667.1669019337@warthog.procyon.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 08:28:57AM +0000, David Howells wrote: > > That would be much preferred over the for_write_begin hack, given that > > write_begin really isn't a well defined method but a hacky hook for > > legacy write implementations. > > So I don't need to worry about the control group stuff? I'll still need some > way to flush a conflicting write whatever mechanism is being used to write to > the page cache. cgroup is used for throttling writeback. If you need to flush conflicting writes I can't see how interacting with the cgroups benefits anyone. An as far as I can tell afs doesn't support cgroup writeback to start with.