Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] mm: mprotect: convert to folio_needs_prot_numa()

[David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>]

On 20.10.25 17:14, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2025/10/20 21:10, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 02:18:44PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>>> The prot_numa_skip() naming is not good since it updates the folio
>>> access time except checking whether to skip prot NUMA, so rename it
>>> to folio_needs_prot_numa(), and cleanup it a bit, remove ret by
>>
>> Hmm not sure 'folio_needs_prot_numa()' is any better in terms of indicating
>> that you're updating the access time to be honest.
>>
>> Also it seems to suggest that you're determining whether a mapping of the
>> folio should be made a NUMA hint by the folio alone rather than the reality
>> that the mapping is being considered for NUMA hinting and you're checking
>> to see if you actually have to do it.

... because the folio doesn't need prot_none protection for NUMA hitning? :)

>>
>> prot_numa_hint_needed() seems better to me?
>>
>> folio_xxx() stuff all seems to be derived from the folio alone.
> 
> Naming is hard, David suggested it with folio_ prefix in v2,
> the most check are derived from folio, but I could update it if
> we like the new prot_numa_hint_needed().

I prefer what we have here, but I will not fight for it.

-- 
Cheers

David / dhildenb