[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YHcrRMsmrXd5n3oQ@cmpxchg.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 13:49:56 -0400
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, guro@...com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shakeelb@...gle.com,
vdavydov.dev@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, duanxiongchun@...edance.com,
fam.zheng@...edance.com
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH 4/7] mm: memcontrol: simplify
lruvec_holds_page_lru_lock
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 06:00:42PM +0800, Muchun Song wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 5:44 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue 13-04-21 14:51:50, Muchun Song wrote:
> > > We already have a helper lruvec_memcg() to get the memcg from lruvec, we
> > > do not need to do it ourselves in the lruvec_holds_page_lru_lock(). So use
> > > lruvec_memcg() instead. And if mem_cgroup_disabled() returns false, the
> > > page_memcg(page) (the LRU pages) cannot be NULL. So remove the odd logic
> > > of "memcg = page_memcg(page) ? : root_mem_cgroup". And use lruvec_pgdat
> > > to simplify the code. We can have a single definition for this function
> > > that works for !CONFIG_MEMCG, CONFIG_MEMCG + mem_cgroup_disabled() and
> > > CONFIG_MEMCG.
> >
> > Neat. While you are at it wouldn't it make sesne to rename the function
> > as well. I do not want to bikeshed but this is really a misnomer. it
> > doesn't check anything about locking. page_belongs_lruvec?
>
> Right. lruvec_holds_page_lru_lock is used to check whether
> the page belongs to the lruvec. page_belongs_lruvec
> obviously more clearer. I can rename it to
> page_belongs_lruvec the next version.
This sounds strange to me, I think 'belongs' needs a 'to' to be
correct, so page_belongs_to_lruvec(). Still kind of a mouthful.
page_matches_lruvec()?
page_from_lruvec()?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists