On 2023/4/11 2:33, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
On 04/10, Chao Yu wrote:
We have maintain PagePrivate and page_private and page reference
w/ {set,clear}_page_private_*, it doesn't need to call
folio_detach_private() in the end of .invalidate_folio and
.release_folio, remove it and use f2fs_bug_on instead.
Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]>
---
fs/f2fs/data.c | 7 +++++--
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
index 4946df6dd253..8b179b4bdc03 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
@@ -3737,7 +3737,8 @@ void f2fs_invalidate_folio(struct folio *folio, size_t
offset, size_t length)
inode->i_ino == F2FS_COMPRESS_INO(sbi))
clear_page_private_data(&folio->page);
- folio_detach_private(folio);
+ f2fs_bug_on(sbi, PagePrivate(&folio->page));
+ f2fs_bug_on(sbi, page_private(&folio->page));
I think we can just check page_private() only.
Why? how about the case PagePrivate was set, but page_private was't? It must
be a bug as well?
Thanks,
}
bool f2fs_release_folio(struct folio *folio, gfp_t wait)
@@ -3759,7 +3760,9 @@ bool f2fs_release_folio(struct folio *folio, gfp_t wait)
clear_page_private_reference(&folio->page);
clear_page_private_gcing(&folio->page);
- folio_detach_private(folio);
+ f2fs_bug_on(sbi, PagePrivate(&folio->page));
+ f2fs_bug_on(sbi, page_private(&folio->page));
+
return true;
}
--
2.25.1
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
