[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210208151920.GE12872@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2021 16:19:20 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
darrick.wong@...cle.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
willy@...radead.org, jack@...e.cz, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com,
david@...morbit.com, hch@....de, rgoldwyn@...e.de,
Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] fsdax: Dedup file range to use a compare function
On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 01:09:22AM +0800, Shiyang Ruan wrote:
> With dax we cannot deal with readpage() etc. So, we create a
> funciton callback to perform the file data comparison and pass
s/funciton/function/g
> +#define MIN(a, b) (((a) < (b)) ? (a) : (b))
This should use the existing min or min_t helpers.
> int generic_remap_file_range_prep(struct file *file_in, loff_t pos_in,
> struct file *file_out, loff_t pos_out,
> - loff_t *len, unsigned int remap_flags)
> + loff_t *len, unsigned int remap_flags,
> + compare_range_t compare_range_fn)
Can we keep generic_remap_file_range_prep as-is, and add a new
dax_remap_file_range_prep, both sharing a low-level
__generic_remap_file_range_prep implementation? And for that
implementation I'd also go for classic if/else instead of the function
pointer.
> +extern int vfs_dedupe_file_range_compare(struct inode *src, loff_t srcoff,
> + struct inode *dest, loff_t destoff,
> + loff_t len, bool *is_same);
no need for the extern.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists