No! You are wrong. I wrote the AFS code. I *know* it can only deal with
single pages. It has no knowledge of compound pages and does not handle page
arrays. This may be a flaw in my code, but it's there nonetheless. The
assertion is a guard against that. *That* was the point of my statement.
Perhaps I should've said 'my code' rather than 'the code'.
If Christoph has a patch to deal with that, it's either not upstream yet or it
hasn't altered AFS.
The convention is not precisely clear. Just grep for PAGE_CACHE_SIZE in
Documentation/. It's only mentioned twice, and in neither case does it give
any information about what PAGE_CACHE_SIZE is, what it represents, or where it
applies. Therefore it's an ill-defined concept.
If you look in Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt, you'll see that it almost
always talks about 'pages'. It only mentions 'pagecache pages' once - in the
description of write_begin(), but it's not clear whether that means anything.
However, I've now noted that I need to fix my code, so just keep the assertion
for now and I'll fix my code to handle multipage blocks.
David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html