Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 9 Sep 2021 12:17:00 -0700 | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] Memory folios for v5.15 | From | John Hubbard <> |
| |
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.
thanks, -- John Hubbard NVIDIA
| |