The comment in dax_folio_reset_order() claims that DAX maintains an
invariant where folio->share != 0 only when folio->mapping == NULL,
implying folio->share is zero whenever mapping is non-NULL. This is
misleading because folio->share and folio->index are a union -- for
non-shared folios with mapping != NULL, reading folio->share returns
the file page offset (folio->index), which is typically non-zero.
Reword the comment to accurately describe the union aliasing: the
assignment clears whichever interpretation of the union word is active
(index for non-shared folios, share for shared folios), which is correct
because the folio is being released in either case.
No functional change -- the code was already correct, only the
justification was wrong.
Fixes: 59eb73b98a ("dax: Factor out dax_folio_reset_order() helper")
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: John Groves <john@groves.net>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/0100019ecc08b8cd-4ee80eeb-1341-4f67-8478-7298129440e9-000000@email.amazonses.com
Signed-off-by: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>
3fc3ebf40b