lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Nov]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v2] mm, netfs, fscache: Stop read optimisation when folio removed from pagecache
On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 04:02:20PM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> @@ -3941,6 +3941,10 @@ bool filemap_release_folio(struct folio *folio, gfp_t gfp)
> struct address_space * const mapping = folio->mapping;
>
> BUG_ON(!folio_test_locked(folio));
> + if ((!mapping || !mapping_release_always(mapping))
> + && !folio_test_private(folio) &&
> + !folio_test_private_2(folio))
> + return true;

Why do you need to test 'mapping' here? Also this is the most
inconsistent style ...

if ((!mapping || !mapping_release_always(mapping)) &&
!folio_test_private(folio) && !folio_test_private_2(folio))

works fine, but if you insist on splitting over three lines, then:

if ((!mapping || !mapping_release_always(mapping)) &&
!folio_test_private(folio) &&
!folio_test_private_2(folio))

> @@ -276,7 +275,7 @@ static long mapping_evict_folio(struct address_space *mapping,
> if (folio_ref_count(folio) >
> folio_nr_pages(folio) + folio_has_private(folio) + 1)

I think this line is incorrect, right? You don't increment the folio
refcount just because the folio has private2 set, do you?

> return 0;
> - if (folio_has_private(folio) && !filemap_release_folio(folio, 0))
> + if (!filemap_release_folio(folio, 0))
> return 0;
>
> return remove_mapping(mapping, folio);

Can we get rid of folio_has_private() / page_has_private() now?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-11-15 05:10    [W:0.067 / U:0.716 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site