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=-3.6 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 31BA3C4338F for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 06:35:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15A40613A7 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 06:35:01 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 15A40613A7 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 704156B006C; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 02:35:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 6B4236B0071; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 02:35:00 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 5A3318D0001; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 02:35:00 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0119.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.119]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D9366B006C for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 02:35:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin10.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB69282499A8 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 06:34:59 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78512640318.10.9487399 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FF2EB0000AA for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 06:34:59 +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=2XLmr3mig5i7hFsrhfybeAZVxu1dPFwBTiqJmo2ZjDs=; b=Y/vL5A1XzYQGjecTWV5ZlubPWZ GTZIZXOm9XJO0Be7zs+Aj9ueGAGEfnmZxexw/PUD7kF5QYnOLhKGqh6ujtUIll2y3crONRFnfjkGn XEu2lb0XgzN21b5//QSf3Sv9zeguPFet/OyzEGBOr15LkzC0jf9WMzGNFJcV1sbUOfakeh/IJIu0t 4vy3wCYV2ew5sq+yeoArOQi4ZTTkE3L1TxQPPwlnCJztnkkQ/YGQhC9FaGF6hdJlYrGnvNWebM0Ii RTsykyka9MLAs4Hll6kzSOxoIXa7sdJc6rVZLftLKAjjpWr85iqzHgOf5apapcyTgtQ7/qrAkuPm+ 4hrxNGVw==; Received: from hch by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mImSq-00ByML-7A; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 06:32:54 +0000 Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 07:32:44 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Theodore Ts'o Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Linus Torvalds , David Howells , Johannes Weiner , Linux-MM , linux-fsdevel , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Memory folios for v5.15 Message-ID: References: <1957060.1629820467@warthog.procyon.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by casper.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Authentication-Results: imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b="Y/vL5A1X"; spf=none (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of BATV@casper.srs.infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=BATV@casper.srs.infradead.org; dmarc=none X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 5FF2EB0000AA X-Stat-Signature: z5798j9b58j5z1we8iyj5ipuxrichtq6 X-HE-Tag: 1629873299-814344 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 Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 03:44:48PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > The problem is whether we use struct head_page, or folio, or mempages, > we're going to be subsystem users' faces. And people who are using it > every day will eventually get used to anything, whether it's "folio" > or "xmoqax", we sould give a thought to newcomers to Linux file system > code. If they see things like "read_folio()", they are going to be > far more confused than "read_pages()" or "read_mempages()". Are they? It's not like page isn't some randomly made up term as well, just one that had a lot more time to spread. > So if someone sees "kmem_cache_alloc()", they can probably make a > guess what it means, and it's memorable once they learn it. > Similarly, something like "head_page", or "mempages" is going to a bit > more obvious to a kernel newbie. So if we can make a tiny gesture > towards comprehensibility, it would be good to do so while it's still > easier to change the name. All this sounds really weird to me. I doubt there is any name that nicely explains "structure used to manage arbitrary power of two units of memory in the kernel" very well. So I agree with willy here, let's pick something short and not clumsy. I initially found the folio name a little strange, but working with it I got used to it quickly. And all the other uggestions I've seen s far are significantly worse, especially all the odd compounds with page in it.