On 8/26/2024 11:14 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 8/26/24 10:06 AM, Kanchan Joshi wrote: >> Change i_write_hint (in inode), bi_write_hint (in bio) and write_hint >> (in request) to use u8 data-type rather than this enum. > > That sounds fishy to me. Why to increase the size of this enum? Why to > reduce the ability of the compiler to perform type checking? I think > this needs to be motivated clearly in the patch description.
Since inode/bio/request stopped using this, the __packed annotation did not seem to serve much purpose. But sure, I can retain the size/checks on the renamed enum (rw_life_hint) too. Motivation for keeping u8 in inode/bio/request is to represent another hint type. This is similar to ioprio where multiple io priority classes/values are expressed within an int type. _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
