From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753116Ab1EWH1I (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 03:27:08 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:46525 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751061Ab1EWH1H (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 03:27:07 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 03:27:05 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Linus Torvalds , Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: Adding an ugliness in __read_cache_page()? Message-ID: <20110523072705.GA3966@infradead.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 03:25:31PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote: > I find both ways ugly, but no nice alternative: introducing a new method > when the known callers are already tied to tmpfs/ramfs seems over the top. Calling into shmem directly is the less ugly variant. Long term killing that tmpfs abuse would be even better, but I already lost that fight when it was initially added.