Re: [PATCH 01/12] iomap: pass more arguments using the iomap writeback context

On Wed, Jul 2, 2025 at 11:18 AM Darrick J. Wong [off-list ref] wrote:

On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 08:41:13AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 07:44:07AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 11:12:20AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:

quoted

I find it slightly annoying that the struct name now implies 'wbc,'
which is obviously used by the writeback_control inside it. It would be
nice to eventually rename wpc to something more useful, but that's for
another patch:

True, but wbc is already taken by the writeback_control structure.
Maybe I should just drop the renaming for now?

Yeah, that's what makes it confusing IMO. writeback_ctx looks like it
would be wbc, but it's actually wpc and wbc is something internal. But I
dunno.. it's not like the original struct name is great either.

I was thinking maybe rename the wpc variable name to something like
wbctx (or maybe wbctx and wbctl? *shrug*). Not to say that is elegant by
any stretch, but just to better differentiate from wbc/wpc and make the
code a little easier to read going forward. I don't really have a strong
opinion wrt this series so I don't want to bikeshed too much. Whatever
you want to go with is fine by me.

I'd have gone with iwc or iwbc, but I don't really care that much. :)

Now I'm confused because I've now seen the same patch from joanne and
hch and don't know which one is going forward.  Maybe I should just wait
for a combined megaseries...

Christoph's is the main source of truth and mine is just pulling his
patches and putting the fuse changes on top of that :) For the v3 fuse
iomap patchset [1], the iomap patches in that were taken verbatim from
his "refactor the iomap writeback code v2" patchset [2].


[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20250624022135.832899-1-joannelkoong@gmail.com/ (local)
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20250617105514.3393938-1-hch@lst.de/ (local)

--D

quoted

Brian