[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200220151048.GW24185@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 07:10:48 -0800
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, cluster-devel@...hat.com,
ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 10/24] mm: Add readahead address space operation
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:00:30AM -0500, Zi Yan wrote:
> > +/* The index of the first page in this readahead block */
> > +static inline unsigned int readahead_index(struct readahead_control *rac)
> > +{
> > + return rac->_index;
> > +}
>
> rac->_index is pgoff_t, so readahead_index() should return the same type, right?
> BTW, pgoff_t is unsigned long.
Oh my goodness! Thank you for spotting that. Fortunately, it's only
currently used by tracepoints, so it wasn't causing any trouble, but
that's a nasty landmine to leave lying around. Fixed:
static inline pgoff_t readahead_index(struct readahead_control *rac)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists