On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 02:24:58PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 5/3/18 2:15 PM, Adam Manzanares wrote:
> > On 5/3/18 11:33 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >> Or we could just make ki_hint a u8 or u16 ... seems unlikely we'll need
> >> 32 bits of ki_hint. (currently defined values are 1-5)
> >
> > I like the approach of using a u16 for the ki_hint. I'll update and
> > resubmit.
>
> It's intended to be a mask. If you do shrink it for now, then we need some
> guard code to ensure it can always carry what it needs to.
ummm ...
enum rw_hint {
WRITE_LIFE_NOT_SET = 0,
WRITE_LIFE_NONE = RWH_WRITE_LIFE_NONE,
WRITE_LIFE_SHORT = RWH_WRITE_LIFE_SHORT,
...
.ki_hint = file_write_hint(filp),
static inline enum rw_hint file_write_hint(struct file *file)
#define RWF_WRITE_LIFE_NOT_SET 0
#define RWH_WRITE_LIFE_NONE 1
#define RWH_WRITE_LIFE_SHORT 2
#define RWH_WRITE_LIFE_MEDIUM 3
#define RWH_WRITE_LIFE_LONG 4
#define RWH_WRITE_LIFE_EXTREME 5
It doesn't look like it's being used as a mask.
