Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm: remove page_is_file_lru function

[Alex Shi <seakeel@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 9:28 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 09:10:20PM +0800, alexs@kernel.org wrote:
> > From: Alex Shi <alexs@kernel.org>
> >
> > This function could be full replaced by folio_is_file_lru, so no reason
> > to keep a duplicate function.
>
> This is not a helpful way to do this kind of replacement.
>
> Instead of choosing a function to remove and doing a blind replacement,
> choose a call site and convert the whole calling function to use folios.
> Once you've removed all callers, you can remove the wrapper function.
>
> Also, a number of changes here will conflict with patches I've already
> posted.  Try doing change_pte_range() in mprotect.c to get a feel for
> how to convert a function entirely to folios.

Hi Willy,

Thanks for your comments!

The patchset did the thing as you required "convert the whole calling
function to use folios. then remove the wrapper function" on yesterday's
Linus and next tree, that included your patchset "Page cache/iomap for 5.17".

Is the conflicting patch "Enabling large folios for 5.17" or others? Sorry
for can't check everyone, your patches are many. If just the former, I see
you mentioned: "I'd be uncomfortable seeing it merged before 5.18".
Would you point out which of your patches was interfered or blocked?

And yes, replacing page functions in change_pte_range is a bit harder,
but it seems it has no much relation with this trival patchset.

Thanks
Alex