On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 7:13 AM Christoph Hellwig [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

+static void iomap_read_folio_range_bio_async(const struct iomap_iter *iter,
+             struct iomap_readpage_ctx *ctx, loff_t pos, size_t plen)

The _async here feels very misplaced, because pretty much everyting in
the area except for the odd write_begin helper is async, and the postfix
does not match the method name.

Also as a general discussion for naming, having common prefixed for sets
of related helpers is nice.  Maybe use iomap_bio_* for all the bio
helpers were're adding here?  We can then fix the direct I/O code to
match that later.

Great point, I'll change this to "iomap_bio_read_folio_range()" for
the async version and then "iomap_bio_read_folio_range_sync()" for the
synchronous version.

quoted

 {
+     struct folio *folio = ctx->cur_folio;
      const struct iomap *iomap = &iter->iomap;
-     loff_t pos = iter->pos;

Looking at the caller, it seems we should not need the pos argument if
we adjust pos just after calculating count at the beginning of the loop.
I think that would be a much better interface.

Sounds good, in that case I think we should do the same for the the
buffered writes ->read_folio_range() api later too then to have it
match

Thanks,
Joanne