Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <82ade7f2-017e-af6b-2fb3-eb1a3f570505@kernel.dk>
Date:   Wed, 22 Mar 2023 17:15:48 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.9.0
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the mm tree
Content-Language: en-US
To:     David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com>
References: <20230323100204.0917cecf@canb.auug.org.au>
 <3431084.1679526799@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
In-Reply-To: <3431084.1679526799@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 3/22/23 5:13 PM, David Howells wrote:
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
>>  +	if (unlikely(iov_iter_is_pipe(i))) {
>>  +		copied = copy_page_to_iter_pipe(page, offset, bytes, i);
>>  +		goto out;
>>  +	}
> 
> This bit would need to be removed from copy_page_to_iter_atomic() as the two
> functions it calls should be removed by the patch in the block tree.

Maybe it'd be better to consolidate rather than split the changes over
two trees?

-- 
Jens Axboe