| Message ID | 20220705022219.286459-1-xiubli@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [RFC] netfs: do not get the folio reference twice | expand |
On 7/5/22 10:22 AM, xiubli@redhat.com wrote: > From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > > And also the comment said it will drop the folio references but > the code was increasing it. > > Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > --- > fs/netfs/buffered_read.c | 3 --- > 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/netfs/buffered_read.c b/fs/netfs/buffered_read.c > index 5b93e22397fe..a44a5b3b8d4c 100644 > --- a/fs/netfs/buffered_read.c > +++ b/fs/netfs/buffered_read.c > @@ -396,9 +396,6 @@ int netfs_write_begin(struct netfs_inode *ctx, > */ > ractl._nr_pages = folio_nr_pages(folio); > netfs_rreq_expand(rreq, &ractl); > - > - /* We hold the folio locks, so we can drop the references */ > - folio_get(folio); > while (readahead_folio(&ractl)) > ; > Will drop this patch, the above fix it incorrect. Thanks!
diff --git a/fs/netfs/buffered_read.c b/fs/netfs/buffered_read.c index 5b93e22397fe..a44a5b3b8d4c 100644 --- a/fs/netfs/buffered_read.c +++ b/fs/netfs/buffered_read.c @@ -396,9 +396,6 @@ int netfs_write_begin(struct netfs_inode *ctx, */ ractl._nr_pages = folio_nr_pages(folio); netfs_rreq_expand(rreq, &ractl); - - /* We hold the folio locks, so we can drop the references */ - folio_get(folio); while (readahead_folio(&ractl)) ;