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 640983A1B7; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 19:26:59 +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=1709321221; cv=none; b=JjvpeU5gpnDM8R+lQnaHmdAO6GPR1c2lDRc1j4Cl1S7M7T2miCMw2UtCvEo4RLFWDamOlOXLL0V4gOCJu8SU56mC5eZK0/T17SyDrqYIymtuHrvgVgGn8IL4RMyNtoGemyk/g4M3fc4PaNPZKW1MrSVwsCHSpTE/tVZGzUYnKe4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709321221; c=relaxed/simple; bh=kaSykyFIWcgLYerUBDYqhN2sEqTha2qYZpO3zUJw2GI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=bYci9eoOxb5v374nUeXmmd0582Y6GLpsaQyaO+feRuQ5Knyt5htLjeKFz0RJBqu1AzLitjUCPC5nKo0KLYIvDWGMSbwOAWK3ugP0TSCVFTTfAtsL0+0kK1PrFrN41XPWpTWbTyh5qX8yt0vyOOqQDZg4z/pAnVPaXxH+pjAE3c8= 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=Ybvg9RV0; 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="Ybvg9RV0" 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=/2k9Ny7iGQGTNen6Wn7IjRx3a2E4Jj92/u6+1Zea9no=; b=Ybvg9RV0Gde632PiFIc43hHze0 iWF8DGBZ7TOlrbN1f5/ZIZ7wcE/sxUzP3jY8eCH/OBRd9eeCx95AC6rnwCVVc/MEOAEw4DV6kbv/x 6eQS9KZCEL4JaE9SiTP910MCvJWfrAyb6LG9z3rlYnDqmG/fT+NqN31YVFNYyka0S8bupSuzmrvkY VFoNblpQDTSbUZr2+hV7Kj45r4KdPjQFEVbe7zJXGJGxCXe4OHlGYTU0Ylihekg/aQO/tcLmGNcoc fNdSJPtktbPi0OM11Rd7zM3vvyD3zLUXrxWhuyV0UlPZvrgBXlXLnvnFsiiOCUprp6lIjnAH6whvH fy3nW0Vg==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rg8X1-0000000BhNj-0rOA; Fri, 01 Mar 2024 19:26:55 +0000 Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2024 19:26:55 +0000 From: Matthew Wilcox To: "Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)" Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, djwong@kernel.org, mcgrof@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, hare@suse.de, david@fromorbit.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, gost.dev@samsung.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, chandan.babu@oracle.com, Pankaj Raghav Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/13] filemap: align the index to mapping_min_order in the page cache Message-ID: References: <20240301164444.3799288-1-kernel@pankajraghav.com> <20240301164444.3799288-4-kernel@pankajraghav.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: <20240301164444.3799288-4-kernel@pankajraghav.com> On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 05:44:34PM +0100, Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote: > +#define DEFINE_READAHEAD_ALIGNED(ractl, f, r, m, i) \ > + struct readahead_control ractl = { \ > + .file = f, \ > + .mapping = m, \ > + .ra = r, \ > + ._index = mapping_align_start_index(m, i), \ > + } My point was that you didn't need to do any of this. Look, I've tried to give constructive review, but I feel like I'm going to have to be blunt. There is no evidence of design or understanding in these patches or their commit messages. You don't have a coherent message about "These things have to be aligned; these things can be at arbitrary alignment". If you have thought about it, it doesn't show. Maybe you just need to go back over the patches and read them as a series, but it feels like "Oh, there's a hole here, patch it; another hole here, patch it" without thinking about what's going on and why. I want to help, but it feels like it'd be easier to do all the work myself at this point, and that's not good for me, and it's not good for you. So, let's start off: Is the index in ractl aligned or not, and why do you believe that's the right approach? And review each of the patches in this series with the answer to that question in mind because you are currently inconsistent.