From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: set_page_dirty variants
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 01:19:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210322011907.GB1719932@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
We currently have three near-identical implementations of the
set_page_dirty address_space op:
__set_page_dirty_no_writeback added 2007 by Ken Chen (767193253bba)
(return value fixed by Bob Liu in 2011 (c3f0da631539))
anon_set_page_dirty added 2009 by Peter Zijlstra (d3a9262e59f7)
noop_set_page_dirty added 2018 by Dan Williams (f44c77630d26)
I persuaded Mike to remove hugetlbfs_set_page_dirty and
Daniel Vetter to remove fb_deferred_io_set_page_dirty (in -next)
so we're down from five to three.
I'd like to get it down to zero. After all, the !mapping case in
set_page_dirty() is exactly what we want. So is there a problem
with doing this?
+++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
@@ -2562 +2562 @@ int set_page_dirty(struct page *page)
- if (likely(mapping)) {
+ if (likely(mapping && mapping_can_writeback(mapping))) {
But then I noticed that we have both mapping_can_writeback()
and mapping_use_writeback_tags(), and I'm no longer sure
which one to use. Also, why don't we mirror the results of
inode_to_bdi(mapping->host)->capabilities & BDI_CAP_WRITEBACK into
a mapping->flags & AS_something bit? We have lots available, and
inode_to_bdi seems relatively complicated to be a static inline that
gets evaluated every time we call
pagecache_get_page(FGP_CREAT | FGP_WRITE).
next reply other threads:[~2021-03-22 1:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-22 1:19 Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2021-03-23 15:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-23 16:30 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-03-23 16:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210322011907.GB1719932@casper.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox