Re: [GIT PULL] Memory folios for v5.15

[Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>]

On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 12:17:00PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 9/9/21 06:56, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > On 9/9/21 14:43, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > So what is the result here?  Not having folios (with that or another
> > > name) is really going to set back making progress on sane support for
> > > huge pages.  Both in the pagecache but also for other places like direct
> > > I/O.
> > 
> > Yeah, the silence doesn't seem actionable. If naming is the issue, I believe
> > Matthew had also a branch where it was renamed to pageset. If it's the
> > unclear future evolution wrt supporting subpages of large pages, should we
> > just do nothing until somebody turns that hypothetical future into code and
> > we see whether it works or not?
> > 
> 
> When I saw Matthew's proposal to rename folio --> pageset, my reaction was,
> "OK, this is a huge win!". Because:
> 
> * The new name addressed Linus' concerns about naming, which unblocks it
>   there, and
> 
> * The new name seems to meet all of the criteria of the "folio" name,
>   including even grep-ability, after a couple of tiny page_set and pageset
>   cases are renamed--AND it also meets Linus' criteria for self-describing
>   names.
> 
> So I didn't want to add noise to that thread, but now that there is still
> some doubt about this, I'll pop up and suggest: do the huge
> 's/folio/pageset/g', and of course the associated renaming of the conflicting
> existing pageset and page_set cases, and then maybe it goes in.

So I've done that.

https://git.infradead.org/users/willy/pagecache.git/shortlog/refs/tags/pageset-5.15

I sent it to Linus almost two weeks ago:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/YSmtjVTqR9%2F4W1aq@casper.infradead.org/

Still nothing, so I presume he's still thinking about it.