On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 01:16:59PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Fri, Aug 29, 2025 at 04:56:12PM -0700, Joanne Koong wrote: > > Move the iomap_readpage_iter() async bio read logic into a separate > > helper function. This is needed to make iomap read/readahead more > > generically usable, especially for filesystems that do not require > > CONFIG_BLOCK. > > > > Rename iomap_read_folio_range() to iomap_read_folio_range_sync() to > > diferentiate between the synchronous and asynchronous bio folio read > > calls. > > Hrmm. Readahead is asynchronous, whereas reading in data as part of an > unaligned write to a file must be synchronous. How about naming it > iomap_readahead_folio_range() ? > > Oh wait, iomap_read_folio also calls iomap_readpage_iter, which uses the > readahead paths to fill out a folio, but then waits for the folio lock > to drop, which effectively makes it ... a synchronous user of > asynchronous code. > > Bleh, naming is hard. Though the code splitting seems fine... Maybe we can look at it from a different angle - the code split out isn't really about async vs sync, but about actually using a bio to read data from a block device. Which is also kinda important for what Joanne is trying to do. So I'd encode that in the name, e.g. iomap_read_folio_range_bio to mimici the naming used for iomap_dio_bio_iter in the direct I/O code.
