Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] mm: introduce zone lock wrappers

[Dmitry Ilvokhin <d@ilvokhin.com>]

On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 04:31:39PM -0800, SeongJae Park wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 18:26:18 +0000 Dmitry Ilvokhin <d@ilvokhin.com> wrote:
> 
> > Add thin wrappers around zone lock acquire/release operations. This
> > prepares the code for future tracepoint instrumentation without
> > modifying individual call sites.
> > 
> > Centralizing zone lock operations behind wrappers allows future
> > instrumentation or debugging hooks to be added without touching
> > all users.
> > 
> > No functional change intended. The wrappers are introduced in
> > preparation for subsequent patches and are not yet used.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Ilvokhin <d@ilvokhin.com>
> > Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
> > ---
> >  MAINTAINERS               |  1 +
> >  include/linux/zone_lock.h | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 39 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 include/linux/zone_lock.h
> > 
> > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > index 55af015174a5..61e3d1f5bf43 100644
> > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > @@ -16680,6 +16680,7 @@ F:	include/linux/pgtable.h
> >  F:	include/linux/ptdump.h
> >  F:	include/linux/vmpressure.h
> >  F:	include/linux/vmstat.h
> > +F:	include/linux/zone_lock.h
> >  F:	kernel/fork.c
> >  F:	mm/Kconfig
> >  F:	mm/debug.c
> > diff --git a/include/linux/zone_lock.h b/include/linux/zone_lock.h
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..c531e26280e6
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/include/linux/zone_lock.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> > +#ifndef _LINUX_ZONE_LOCK_H
> > +#define _LINUX_ZONE_LOCK_H
> > +
> > +#include <linux/mmzone.h>
> > +#include <linux/spinlock.h>
> 
> I'm bit worried if I will think this as a file for another general locking, not
> the mm specific one.  I hence think renaming it to more clearly saying the
> fact, say, mmzone_lock.h, might be less confusing.  Or, putting things in
> mmzone.h might also be an option?  What do you think?

Thanks for the feedback, SJ.

Good point. I agree the current name looks too generic. Putting it into
mmzone.h would further overload that header, so renaming zone_lock.h to
mmzone_lock.h seems like the clearest option.

I'll make that change in v4.

> 
> 
> Thanks,
> SJ
> 
> [...]