On Fri, May 02, 2025 at 05:31:49AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Thu, May 01, 2025 at 09:26:25PM -0700, Matthew Brost wrote: > > > I;m fairly certain is just aliasing... but I do understand a file cannot > > be embedded. Would comment help here indicating no other fields should > > be added to ttm_backup without struct file be converted to pointer or > > that just to risky? > > What exactly are you trying to do there? IOW, is that always supposed to > be a struct file, or something dependent upon something in struct ttm_tt > instance, or...?
Create an opaque ttm_backup object for the rest of TTM / drivers to view - it could change if the backup implementation changed. > > And what is the lifecycle of that thing? E.g. what is guaranteed about > ttm_backup_fini() vs. functions accessing the damn thing? Are they > serialized on something/tied to lifecycle stages of struct ttm_tt? I believe the life cycle is when ttm_tt is destroyed or api allows overriding the old backup with a new one (currently unused). Matt
