Re: [PATCH v1 2/5] mm/rmap: introduce and use hugetlb_remove_rmap()

[Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 05:39:35PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> Quoting from the cover letter:
> 
> "We have hugetlb special-casing/checks in the callers in all cases either
> way already in place: it doesn't make too much sense to call generic-looking
> functions that end up doing hugetlb specific things from hugetlb
> special-cases."

I'll take this one as an example: I think one goal (of my understanding of
the mm community) is to make the generic looking functions keep being
generic, dropping any function named as "*hugetlb*" if possible one day
within that generic implementation.  I said that in my previous reply.

Having that "*hugetlb*" code already in the code base may or may not be a
good reason to further move it upward the stack.

Strong feelings?  No, I don't have.  I'm not knowledged enough to do so.

Thanks,

-- 
Peter Xu