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:   Wed, 9 Dec 2020 16:51:48 +0100
From:   Stanislaw Gruszka <stf_xl@wp.pl>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
        Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>,
        Justin Forbes <jmforbes@linuxtx.org>,
        bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Alex Shi <alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/filemap: add static for function
 __add_to_page_cache_locked
Message-ID: <20201209155148.GA5552@wp.pl>
References: <20201110115037.f6a53faec8d65782ab65d8b4@linux-foundation.org>
 <ddca2a9e-ed89-5dec-b1af-4f2fd2c99b57@linux.alibaba.com>
 <20201207081556.pwxmhgdxayzbofpi@lion.mk-sys.cz>
 <CAFxkdApgQ4RCt-J43cK4_128pXr=Xn5jw+q0kOaP-TYufk_tPA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAADnVQK-EsdBohcVSaK+zaP9XuPZTBkGbQpkeYcrC9BzoPQUuw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201207225351.2liywqaxxtuezzw3@lion.mk-sys.cz>
 <CAADnVQJARx6sKF-30YsabCd1W+MFDMmfxY+2u0Pm40RHHHQZ6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAADnVQJ6tmzBXvtroBuEH6QA0H+q7yaSKxrVvVxhqr3KBZdEXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201209144628.GA3474@wp.pl>
 <20201209150826.GP7338@casper.infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201209150826.GP7338@casper.infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk

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.

Stanislaw