From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from flow-a6-smtp.messagingengine.com (flow-a6-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.141]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E8EF44236A for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2026 15:06:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.141 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787843204; cv=none; b=Hq+rvd6M8Sa4hBF3pfAoqIRCWN8tVVBFp431f3qkL4WjaTst8OpdoIB1ML2rFqlV2OnrlVGDk41MZP5Z+N4ZfS1pb2RQ175YpRVSw2G4tzKrQFymT9pgobmdKbE95bDJHEUlCJzR8GoGNo2I4XupwxvxVRxdAzQmLjkMfUOXx0w= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787843204; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+JuCJSHEyFJZYkCsiiLUs6awMrfi2Te4XdjsIG5yNjg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=SNWe2dmiS63zTlloLCh2O3Y5IFk16MIuEGwQBgrnkWS5MQ33nNf0OYCcO9BTJwZxrq6EpzeY+cE169r5nohk+V9bM2C3uDszyTqMmU8/f88FMVRUPz2cym6iHZ7ZeiLrF0ch6L25MAkt31t7mlCrfmsuHV2C9HPP6wusxZaMo94= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=shutemov.name; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=shutemov.name; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=shutemov.name header.i=@shutemov.name header.b=ewJL9hJL; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=gCDpB0no; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.141 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=shutemov.name Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=shutemov.name Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=shutemov.name header.i=@shutemov.name header.b="ewJL9hJL"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="gCDpB0no" Received: from phl-compute-02.internal (phl-compute-02.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailflow.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FDF713800BE; Thu, 27 Aug 2026 11:06:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-04 ([10.202.2.163]) by phl-compute-02.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 27 Aug 2026 11:06:42 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=shutemov.name; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1787843202; x= 1787850402; bh=vyVgXPC7XqGZWzz9wNdixBWf9MizjLo93ogBCNARLD0=; b=e wJL9hJL68P74mIyj/2wIZ2DkbFhNV08+Ks+6er8Z5FEqevPdPnxAxWV2nG++1qrM 2xKnV3NiO0bIOSri5WfvXMdm0yne/7P1bsRd2NvTdAaCLvKZHjwlT3dUnKqxqhfu mKwgvn4zPF+oAP7hMAjU2e4IzKFz4FGDt1E8NaDGM9wdQyEk9iRoya9+WsgMMtDY WRakX9Dfn6tmKyPlBVXxnZA6zfO0nrQvENabIdpcrvNvvcetNnBMs6+fFIyTesMk cVblarbQ2ffUmCJyNFDS5pA7EJs45OMjzM4kol6uingknOqVU/JcPG2zW+PcdA98 ceOs7C2JCFLd/Z7cxjSRw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1787843202; x=1787850402; bh=vyVgXPC7XqGZWzz9wNdixBWf9MizjLo93og BCNARLD0=; b=gCDpB0noOCKmpvQ0tgbD9uUfpK/rd1Yk3BVSabI2nqhKZdArI4+ IOncXscrh1DmFVKfWtiwNYvVoeMIRzxsZMG9sHjjiuGcAabTkVnW4v26Hc+GAjBJ GRFvCnF4I9+EMEzwL4XdUhyg+YgVaEP7WmA22EbZdEGGBIoTKAuz5DRmizbJruCz 635a9K9EhZLaGq6Ou8JVxvNk1KSOGE++5lKdgVO8bzoYdO3FL/qLHkxRiHthBntV sHXNuVqKeXq1D76rsPJuAxydKcOVkVEnZverKIrK6oyzklxEaXgDxq7tPXK/yUhG /vkTD1PZ1a0cFnXIQzq8imS3thSeyfSQzMw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: dmFkZTF7rqhqgfgNccL2sR2hyItVdmKcKUadzZgok63Pcy2lXH7+X0fqLqVk/pB6WyGIcu 9MKe0/eXeV6rQomO1IDumtZ+ROQyHaLQNO7F7ESHBVIiKgzH7eB36INx8ifcAzbkCcSdkB YXe8izaqA9Tu9pLIGfNoVjSfZ7NYAM16xvUNys0rpUr7BNMNv5LWriUueN07q9PkXbN1PY z/jN03V+4Y7LxsDv9S1aleZ98TWWU6Q/jICVYj5QwMPZibdeIs8AJwzmOI4UTadWt4XDoN Hjrf9ky6tKoR3muqanBE99vi72fMYN6yuXLmY2h11OWHxrAczFjbbAcpGNkWE6y4rw3vrJ 0O5w6kI6akqRYcAZbkqFXHJydzE09h14qyHoB7jYHLvPHE69ubfyHCqxyGD2960LEPm6CK YtGRCjPD47qD80CBT5p12LcwsskywfRwkX5q0SD8lsIBBFy+r27ubi747GPv6VeeKgdLkt rzKFECsqKX3K4ZzpJ5kTpOPIJhVj9laABHGVdmPIRHo77elfFGr53m8w6/qdOrYpMjERI7 2EOrckafIsqTmJ6+pQ8GGTT7+4w33pYjSChh7RO2PCVH3aY9wsQ3dKgBMggRK8ipVry7lE eVOb7fh6V5TxGyP7iGYYVTUrCn8aiQN0CKYyg05yT/6hlbcfbLQG72JsgWRw X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: ie3994620:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 27 Aug 2026 11:06:40 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2026 16:06:40 +0100 From: Kiryl Shutsemau To: kasong@tencent.com Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , David Hildenbrand , Lorenzo Stoakes , Zi Yan , Baolin Wang , "Liam R. Howlett" , Nico Pache , Ryan Roberts , Dev Jain , Lance Yang , Usama Arif , Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Michal Hocko , Chris Li , Kemeng Shi , Nhat Pham , Baoquan He , Barry Song , Youngjun Park , Shivam Kalra , Kairui Song Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/18] mm/huge_memory: rename __split_unmapped_folio() to __split_frozen_folio() Message-ID: References: <20260821-swap-thp-cleanup-v3-0-9b43f5163238@tencent.com> <20260821-swap-thp-cleanup-v3-5-9b43f5163238@tencent.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260821-swap-thp-cleanup-v3-5-9b43f5163238@tencent.com> On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 02:55:18AM +0800, Kairui Song via B4 Relay wrote: > From: Kairui Song > > The helper splits a folio whose refcount is frozen: the frozen refcount > is the state it relies on, while unmapping is arranged by the caller > beforehand. The old name caused confusion and people may try to call the > helper on non-frozen folios. > > Suggested-by: Zi Yan > Reviewed-by: Zi Yan > Signed-off-by: Kairui Song This patch is fine: Reviewed-by: Kiryl Shutsemau (Meta) > @@ -3989,8 +3989,8 @@ static int __folio_freeze_split_unmapped_anon(struct folio *folio, unsigned int > if (do_lru) > lruvec = folio_lruvec_lock(folio); > > - ret = __split_unmapped_folio(folio, new_order, split_at, NULL, > - NULL, split_type); > + ret = __split_frozen_folio(folio, new_order, split_at, NULL, > + NULL, split_type); > > /* > * Unfreeze the post-split folios and put them back to the right > @@ -4053,8 +4053,8 @@ static int __folio_freeze_split_unmapped_file(struct folio *folio, unsigned int > if (do_lru) > lruvec = folio_lruvec_lock(folio); > > - ret = __split_unmapped_folio(folio, new_order, split_at, xas, > - mapping, split_type); > + ret = __split_frozen_folio(folio, new_order, split_at, xas, > + mapping, split_type); > > /* > * Unfreeze after-split folios and put them back to the right But now you have *unmapped_anon/file() call *frozen_folio(). Given that you introduced *unmapped_anon/file() in the previous patch, why not give them the right names from the start? -- Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov