Re: [PATCH] [11/19] HWPOISON: Refactor truncate to allow direct truncating of page v2

[Nick Piggin]

On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 04:10:01PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > I haven't brought up the caller at this point, but IIRC you had
> > the page locked and mapping confirmed at this point anyway so
> > it would never be an error for your code.
> > 
> > Probably it would be nice to just force callers to verify the page.
> > Normally IMO it is much nicer and clearer to do it at the time the
> > page gets locked, unless there is good reason otherwise.
> 
> Ok. I think I'll just keep it as it is for now.
> 
> The only reason I added the error code was to make truncate_inode_page
> fit into .error_remove_page, but then latter I did another wrapper
> so it could be removed again. But it won't hurt to have it either.

OK, it's more of a cleanup/nit.

One question I had for the others (Andrew? other mm guys?) what is the
feelings of merging this feature? Leaving aside exact implementation
and just considering the high level design and cost/benefit. Last time
there were some people objecting, so I wonder the situation now? So
does anybody need more convincing? :)

Also I will just cc linux-arch. It would be interesting to know whether
powerpc, ia64, or s390 or others would be interested to use this feature?

Thanks,
Nick

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/