On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 08:21:06AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > Yes.. but I'm not totally sure wrt impact on the fbatch checks quite > yet. The next thing I wanted to look at is addressing the same unwritten > mapping vs. dirty folios issue in the seek data/hole path. It's been a > little while since I last investigated there (and that was also before > the whole granular advance approach was devised), but IIRC it would look > rather similar to what this is doing for zero range. That may or may > not justify just making the batch required for both operations and > potentially simplifying this logic further. I'll keep that in mind when > I get to it.. On thing that the batch would be extremely useful for is making iomap_file_unshare not totally suck by reading in all folios for a range (not just the dirty ones) similar to the filemap_read path instead of synchronously reading one block at a time.
