Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm/swap: remove unneeded swap_active_head

[Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>]

On 10/09/25 at 06:28pm, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 15:47:06 +0800 Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 10/08/25 at 08:26pm, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Wed,  1 Oct 2025 12:34:36 +0800 Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > There's no user of swap_active_head, remove it now.
> > > > 
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > @@ -2553,8 +2545,6 @@ static void _enable_swap_info(struct swap_info_struct *si)
> > > >  
> > > >  	assert_spin_locked(&swap_lock);
> > > >  
> > > > -	plist_add(&si->list, &swap_active_head);
> > > > -
> > > 
> > > There's a large comment in _enable_swap_info() which needs to be
> > > removed or updated?
> > 
> > This patchset depends on below patchset:
> > [PATCH v3 0/2] mm/swapfile.c: select the swap device with default priority round robin
> 
> Oh, OK, sorry, missed that.
> 
> (When I'm working on the post-merge-window patch pile (700+ emails) I
> go in reverse-time order, so highlighting dependencies like this helps!)

I see, will mention the dependency at the beginning of cover letter to
highlight this.

> 
> > By the way, Chris worried the plist swap_active_head could be reused by
> > the ongoing swap-tier work and suggested to hold off this patchset till
> > swap-tier work is clear. Now seems it won't impact swap-tier, I will
> > send a v2 against mm-new.
> 
> OK.
> 
> Is Baoquan's "[PATCH v3 0/2] mm/swapfile.c: select the swap device with
> default priority round robin" series still considered good to merge?

Up to now no objection received to the patchset and got ACK from Chris
for "[PATCH v3 0/2] mm/swapfile.c: select the swap device with default
priority round robin".