Re: [prepatch] address_space-based writeback

[torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds)]

In article <5.1.0.14.2.20020410235415.03d41d00@pop.cus.cam.ac.uk>,
Anton Altaparmakov  <aia21@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>Um, NTFS uses address spaces for things where ->host is not an inode at all 
>so doing host->i_sb will give you god knows what but certainly not a super 
>block!

Then that should be fixed in NTFS.

The original meaning of "->host" was that it could be anything (and it
was a "void *", but the fact is that all the generic VM code etc needed
to know about host things like size, locking etc, so for over a year now
"host" has been a "struct inode", and if you need to have something
else, then that something else has to embed a proper inode.

>As long as your patches don't break that is possible to have I am happy... 
>But from what you are saying above I have a bad feeling you are somehow 
>assuming that a mapping's host is an inode...

It's not Andrew who is assuming anything: it _is_. Look at <linux/fs.h>,
and notice the

	struct inode            *host;

part.

		Linus