From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F975C4338F for ; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 01:31:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E26106056C for ; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 01:31:03 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org E26106056C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id F3F306B006C; Fri, 13 Aug 2021 21:31:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id EEFA86B0071; Fri, 13 Aug 2021 21:31:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id DDD268D0001; Fri, 13 Aug 2021 21:31:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0036.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.36]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C263B6B006C for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2021 21:31:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin19.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63AB720433 for ; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 01:31:02 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78471957564.19.1325834 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf15.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBE98D0020E9 for ; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 01:31:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=DlSiQx83vgdiLHCuuw2OL8L/ZHJP2UPE/zBYzlozq/s=; b=Udps3o26/7YSjW58cgj+sExubl P2jsk0yy7OuvRUPQWCfx7QCTikWBZRb7EgF9dYXKbnSpv3Ah1xHKu4gewliPQllPOgqpFD7MUUNNU e9KAP5GUA84pzzhcmJASpbH+b54m136lpu1OfF5aFqRNzS/YHxqPhINktc+zxm2szUa6vQiVu2b3U kLRICt/2VS5yt+Czs3YG0UAif//eVfDyFfuTsv82xMYtC0FPeeuZDTireBKYSOUHaXTkyaS79ccgW zQMcwowtNIUIqoPqVtd7X4uSZ9xcHKiiTumRbCLaLP7jD3sCMZq2Poeo3DiAeuavbbGpRqa3W/C16 n5hKO50A==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mEiUt-00GGmO-9w; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 01:30:15 +0000 Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2021 02:30:03 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Vlastimil Babka Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , Vladimir Davydov Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 040/138] mm/memcg: Convert mem_cgroup_charge() to take a folio Message-ID: References: <20210715033704.692967-1-willy@infradead.org> <20210715033704.692967-41-willy@infradead.org> <40a868bf-61dc-1832-4799-ff85018ebcec@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40a868bf-61dc-1832-4799-ff85018ebcec@suse.cz> X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: CBE98D0020E9 X-Stat-Signature: pup6rggaha6coatwa6n9dq1cstp91roo Authentication-Results: imf15.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=Udps3o26; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf15.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org X-HE-Tag: 1628904661-243008 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 12:54:05PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > -static int __mem_cgroup_charge(struct page *page, struct mem_cgroup *memcg, > > +static int __mem_cgroup_charge(struct folio *folio, struct mem_cgroup *memcg, > > gfp_t gfp) > > The git/next version also renames this function to charge_memcg(), why? The new > name doesn't look that internal as the old one. I don't have a strong opinion > but CCing memcg maintainers who might. Ah, this is Suren's fault :-) https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20210710003626.3549282-2-surenb@google.com/ Renaming it here makes the merge resolution cleaner.