Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 24 Nov 2020 18:56:31 -0800 (PST)
From:   Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
cc:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        William Kucharski <william.kucharski@oracle.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, hch@lst.de,
        hannes@cmpxchg.org, yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com,
        dchinner@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/16] Overhaul multi-page lookups for THP
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.2011241838400.3026@eggly.anvils>
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.11.2011241854140.3099@eggly.anvils>
References: <20201112212641.27837-1-willy@infradead.org> <alpine.LSU.2.11.2011160128001.1206@eggly.anvils> <20201117153947.GL29991@casper.infradead.org> <alpine.LSU.2.11.2011170820030.1014@eggly.anvils> <20201117191513.GV29991@casper.infradead.org>
 <20201117234302.GC29991@casper.infradead.org> <20201125023234.GH4327@casper.infradead.org> <alpine.LSU.2.11.2011241838400.3026@eggly.anvils>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LSU 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 24 Nov 2020, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2020, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 11:43:02PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 07:15:13PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > I find both of these functions exceptionally confusing.  Does this
> > > > make it easier to understand?
> > > 
> > > Never mind, this is buggy.  I'll send something better tomorrow.
> > 
> > That took a week, not a day.  *sigh*.  At least this is shorter.
> 
> Thanks, I'll give it a try (along with the other 4, on top of the 12:

s/12/16/

> maybe on -rc5, maybe on today's mmotm, I'll decide that later).
> 
> Shorter you say, that's good: I was disheartened by the way it got
> more complicated, after your initial truncate_inode_partial_page()
> neatness.  Any hints on what was wrong with my simple fixup to that?
> (But I didn't spend any more time trying to prove or disprove it.)
> 
> Hugh
>