[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100322115508.GE30031@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 11:55:08 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [rfc][patch] mm, fs: warn on missing address space operations
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 04:39:37PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> It's ugly and lazy that we do these default aops in case it has not
> been filled in by the filesystem.
>
> A NULL operation should always mean either: we don't support the
> operation; we don't require any action; or a bug in the filesystem,
> depending on the context.
>
> In practice, if we get rid of these fallbacks, it will be clearer
> what operations are used by a given address_space_operations struct,
> reduce branches, reduce #if BLOCK ifdefs, and should allow us to get
> rid of all the buffer_head knowledge from core mm and fs code.
>
> We could add a patch like this which spits out a recipe for how to fix
> up filesystems and get them all converted quite easily.
Um. Seeing that part of that is for methods absent in mainline (->release(),
->sync()), I'd say that making it mandatory at that point is a bad idea.
As for the rest... We have 90 instances of address_space_operations
in the kernel. Out of those:
28 have ->releasepage != NULL
27 have ->set_page_dirty != NULL
25 have ->invalidatepage != NULL
So I'm not even sure that adding that much boilerplate makes sense.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists