[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20250422164111.f5d3f0756ad94d012180ece5@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 16:41:11 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Shivank Garg <shivankg@....com>
Cc: <shaggy@...nel.org>, <willy@...radead.org>, <david@...hat.com>,
<wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>, <jane.chu@...cle.com>, <ziy@...dia.com>,
<donettom@...ux.ibm.com>, <apopple@...dia.com>,
<jfs-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<syzbot+8bb6fd945af4e0ad9299@...kaller.appspotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/2] mm: add folio_migration_expected_refs() as
inline function
On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 11:40:03 +0000 Shivank Garg <shivankg@....com> wrote:
> Rename the previously static folio_expected_refs() to clarify its
> purpose and scope, making it an inline function
> folio_migration_expected_refs() to calculate expected folio references
> during migration. The function is only suitable for folios unmapped from
> page tables.
>
> ...
>
> +/**
> + * folio_migrate_expected_refs - Count expected references for an unmapped folio.
"folio_migration_expected_refs"
It's concerning that one particular filesystem needs this - one
suspects that it is doing something wrong, or that the present API
offerings were misdesigned. It would be helpful if the changelogs were
to explain what is special about JFS.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists