From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFD7EC54EBC for ; Thu, 12 Jan 2023 15:13:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230166AbjALPNN (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2023 10:13:13 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57904 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234804AbjALPM0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2023 10:12:26 -0500 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E446E551DE; Thu, 12 Jan 2023 07:02:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 274BA68BEB; Thu, 12 Jan 2023 16:02:05 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2023 16:02:04 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: David Howells Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Al Viro , Jens Axboe , Jan Kara , Christoph Hellwig , Matthew Wilcox , Logan Gunthorpe , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Layton , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 8/9] iov_iter, block: Make bio structs pin pages rather than ref'ing if appropriate Message-ID: <20230112150204.GA11315@lst.de> References: <167344725490.2425628.13771289553670112965.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <167344731521.2425628.5403113335062567245.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <15237.1673519321@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <147887.1673535529@warthog.procyon.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <147887.1673535529@warthog.procyon.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 02:58:49PM +0000, David Howells wrote: > That's kind of what I'm doing - though I've left out the else just in case the > VM decides to indicate back both FOLL_GET and FOLL_PIN. I'm not sure why it > would but... It really can't - they are exclusive. Maybe we need an assert for that somewhere, but we surely shouldn't try to deal with it.