Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:f347:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d7csp4465074pxu; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 18:52:08 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxSFbrTlN0OaTKBWwgH/Dkxrh76Z0leaCbdKcgmHLR2U4oJIuP/Yy867NhVAcNSZE+8uk6p X-Received: by 2002:a50:cfcf:: with SMTP id i15mr4837520edk.351.1607568728739; Wed, 09 Dec 2020 18:52:08 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1607568728; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=yRcDWPvPwrGeAYSV322bzM+kfqnea08oa99ev+u1maj6jVl4fNa5Gxc+eO7xSpdsmw 6J4YQdsqCWVTQ0CgoUdxtbbvq1LXdj9e4cJk1dGizTaBgbDa0LNtFVHxa1zH08XC+3qh koXNjhaGOKf63lFrsSZXN6aCDGDCQyE1ohT4e7CnoGzllrB09XXCywM9R/YUBxDibe9a bBoGkYQ35iHoBIDjtaYWxyJCNaIEeQkIUAyyuUKI/HLmN69s5nFoYogNsIeaWP+s1c8X AqlSWvLF5b/up7pNHlVnpMqBtIjn9C1n1imx3YSBQo4VRfHX6TTE2n+1bs7fGl70xm2K 7/1w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=Xprvg0CjhVwlYQTv6O3uBqi4PPTcIEynQtAwEO2H4xU=; b=bwtnp6zZq0j7YdtFj5G5RWy0IiXXw+Jq/3J1pVILhLBIAEOEtcdiUiGy2IOwOayzL9 /CaO8a4JH6P/tCM/fZIaDXkCbGE7yF+FlfXd/s1r/QTwyMloTaY92E3hObmhkRHBZihS 0w6GvZsEFhw7DU5smXl0dOLbsdYydsoZ537vI5W0047nCmquzLjkG2JFAa557ywjJk8p NxowVA4VRSbCnfbxR8/QVlew4YeS4Q5FYAMDFnybr6u/qx0pPU4s20XnVWXLM/oKPE4P tcw0tuvlIWNwVlOXwdoxYE+E5aAicIRCpvvUyE/GMm2t1fSQaMMb+1s4nU5iKdz1pYsf BR3A== 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 q3si1759402eja.541.2020.12.09.18.51.46; Wed, 09 Dec 2020 18:52:08 -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 S1728714AbgLJCca (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 9 Dec 2020 21:32:30 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:39936 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728679AbgLJCcL (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Dec 2020 21:32:11 -0500 Received: from oasis.local.home (cpe-66-24-58-225.stny.res.rr.com [66.24.58.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7EC5E23C43; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 02:31:28 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 21:31:26 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: Alexei Starovoitov Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Stanislaw Gruszka , Matthew Wilcox , 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: <20201209213126.79ca1326@oasis.local.home> In-Reply-To: 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> <20201209223206.GA1935@home.goodmis.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:12:43 -0800 Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > > > > 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? > > huh? what api/abi you're talking about? If the function __add_to_page_cache_locked were to be removed due to the code being rewritten, would it break any user space? If not, then there's nothing to worry about. ;-) -- Steve