From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82A173A8C3; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 16:10:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705939808; cv=none; b=sCnU0hu0YzI5piapY1+1+EYz/OI+diyCuP+dXrSgwPExLmSzKRYzmIqV14xIeQR2GEkUmdoVM5Am2sVAzZn1jEPVpB/vf2YJaldmdq3Irm2xpzrmlR0PSnlAilNuMNOup5pPjj//9GXrRp7v5rJ3lfnpphbmaCwDJEax4JmLRN8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705939808; c=relaxed/simple; bh=GyxujeA6VefOMTAZlZZ4BZpsYAB+TEiG+zBG1fVfzQc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=uuM7dLkrnFnBzxNXXdh6WvbyU91Np8WwVFGJQ0Kt39wbxU2ZWqUKA7Ik1s9SITbSSMzlP6kjq28oEDaeyThsWVgEq59AgYcsAUB881Upb3zFwboUixMrPyQnJBGYlqVzQKqNOHR5I0y6ia7ewBDkNzT/8acnrByZ8O5j+ksmQj0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=bAHg37/D; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="bAHg37/D" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=NGNHyrHMg5T+Qh7WpIiamACVfA9Z4Rcr6JKQhuA9VEY=; b=bAHg37/DgOA2D7Nup2N9IoSCUf RYBdsFsEU0xkski0IK2yvU1A2OMrf/qhwna0hlIEwWl69adYPIHIu53ORHNeF2VBh5Hg6YqXlDLij QgT/abpxa9Ic03QJaHTpi1JbsPKKSfAD09GSoo5WzRD6w09XhsCKb33KdFEtAaiQroP+/MBSczuBJ PUqlXM14wca8GyUxdWtL6h281dGgW485gjFNKwYDyeOQmtaqKuC5cFXaOk2jp+fQu2XsCOZRo+WJs UhFEoChHuXUqVFkeJ67BcBHkeCQZslkJMYJKeIyQiOigfY3G+09Cq0PK3aHfIXU01a0Vs85+b2vdc ADEmH24g==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rRws8-00000000Mhy-0VRc; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 16:10:04 +0000 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 16:10:04 +0000 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Jeff Layton Cc: David Howells , Christian Brauner , netfs@lists.linux.dev, linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, v9fs@lists.linux.dev, linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cachefs@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] netfs: Don't use certain internal folio_*() functions Message-ID: References: <20240122123845.3822570-1-dhowells@redhat.com> <20240122123845.3822570-2-dhowells@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 10:38:58AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Mon, 2024-01-22 at 12:38 +0000, David Howells wrote: > > Filesystems should not be using folio->index not folio_index(folio) and > > I think you mean "should be" here. Also these are not internal functions! They're just functions that filesystems shouldn't be using because filesystems are only exposed to their own folios. The erofs patch used the word "unnecessary", which I like better (2b872b0f466d).