[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aC9KuC1UbJYd2Q3i@gourry-fedora-PF4VCD3F>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 12:03:04 -0400
From: Gregory Price <gourry@...rry.net>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Bharata B Rao <bharata@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com,
dave.hansen@...el.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net, mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
raghavendra.kt@....com, riel@...riel.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
sj@...nel.org, weixugc@...gle.com, willy@...radead.org,
ying.huang@...ux.alibaba.com, ziy@...dia.com, dave@...olabs.net,
nifan.cxl@...il.com, joshua.hahnjy@...il.com,
xuezhengchu@...wei.com, yiannis@...corp.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v0 1/2] migrate: implement
migrate_misplaced_folio_batch
On Thu, May 22, 2025 at 05:59:01PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > +int migrate_misplaced_folio_batch(struct list_head *folio_list, int node)
>
> "migrate_misplaced_folios" ?
>
> :)
something something brevity is the soul of wit
I think i went with _batch to match surrounding code (been a while since
I wrote this), but I don't have strong feelings either way.
~Gregory
Powered by blists - more mailing lists