Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:f347:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d7csp4337757pxu; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:38:19 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxFLfSNQYwugxdWTCJxrX0//1G0BQCzopkBEZyh618KrDBmBZel0nQlrx1N/FnNSzwWMVyw X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:8058:: with SMTP id x24mr3784502ejw.262.1607553499027; Wed, 09 Dec 2020 14:38:19 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1607553499; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=NiouIvYVLE1XbVkyDYsCt6lHOA4qb6tR5PGUj1oiWYeoKwTBKiL/4ZZz7FQWMOP8EA KssquSc1PEyJTQMCW4jmoB6EDZi9YcK3CdmrvlY1ObKuMW6puf0y7rfLC7f8p4ESOZI1 ji6nrKRlMnlhqM0AhMg98Pb+UYCpAnNRNPpioMff3OZYUkK/QqGml4aK+zLWy88C0qaZ L485Hcy6vZB96NHa8WcgbNdfie8Lgc7oDnbtRZSYm5B3THVAUx+q1+nLPl/PcAN1svFR w9MNFHS0a+MMgF6dSfFLluD2YlXfnHYWxnwfD3UW24rl71AwKuNoduOSzr8bD1EdP+bj TC/w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=qnDTvkiTjOt/2rB8nOEGuKi3p+rURfNzNnIWmfCG8Sk=; b=bOcOTMNCf/X2oeFFM7mRUoKZ0rDHYUNUNpVv3YBIIlzSMKyi+FvsNSEWoEy0yj9NgB +44SDqEqhPIiBkcddzjRnbODvpXwj5mBtEyBKrWJrbudUQ6gmMX74lxVDAjd+cT9DOec wP5ckPPVs2/f8JFVdj+zY8/QNeJRWWKQYaJcdyNplqVCTHfDuREQIx6I2Fwk6CnyHAA9 LFKF8vyNGvTtAZbMBBgmUvgbWkqJal3VhNVPQNcVQvp90h/ReO2oG3uKNmnuPwUBFIBj /iACHFDJ39HNGsqLFNT0qjmcMtxEHGm1Z/VOHpnYZdP45yAr80q17SYlz2vjIXZwH74M Y25w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z7si1559315edx.473.2020.12.09.14.37.56; Wed, 09 Dec 2020 14:38:19 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388832AbgLIWdT (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:33:19 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:36720 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388604AbgLIWc5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:32:57 -0500 Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:32:06 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Stanislaw Gruszka , Matthew Wilcox , Alexei Starovoitov , Michal Kubecek , Justin Forbes , bpf , Alex Shi , Andrew Morton , Souptick Joarder , Linux-MM , LKML , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Josef Bacik Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/filemap: add static for function __add_to_page_cache_locked Message-ID: <20201209223206.GA1935@home.goodmis.org> References: <20201207081556.pwxmhgdxayzbofpi@lion.mk-sys.cz> <20201207225351.2liywqaxxtuezzw3@lion.mk-sys.cz> <20201209144628.GA3474@wp.pl> <20201209150826.GP7338@casper.infradead.org> <20201209155148.GA5552@wp.pl> <20201209180552.GA28692@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201209180552.GA28692@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 06:05:52PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 04:51:48PM +0100, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 03:08:26PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 03:46:28PM +0100, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > > > > At this point of release cycle we should probably go with revert, > > > > but I think the main problem is that BPF and ERROR_INJECTION use > > > > function that is not intended to be used externally. For external users > > > > add_to_page_cache_lru() and add_to_page_cache_locked() are exported > > > > and I think those should be used (see the patch below). > > > > > > FWIW, I intend to do some consolidation/renaming in this area. I > > > trust that will not be a problem? > > > > If it does not break anything, it will be not a problem ;-) > > > > It's possible that __add_to_page_cache_locked() can be a global symbol > > with add_to_page_cache_lru() + add_to_page_cache_locked() being just > > static/inline wrappers around it. > > So what happens to BTF if we change this area entirely? Your IDs > sound like some kind of ABI to me, which is extremely scary. Is BTF becoming the new tracepoint? That is, random additions of things like: BTF_ID(func,__add_to_page_cache_locked) Like was done in commit 1e6c62a882155 ("bpf: Introduce sleepable BPF programs") without any notification to the maintainers of the __add_to_page_cache_locked code, will suddenly become an API? There's no mention in the change log to why __add_to_page_cache_locked was added. And interesting enough, __add_to_page_cache_locked is not in any header file, which is why it was switched to static. -- Steve