Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 28 Nov 2023 12:13:53 -0500 | From | Peter Xu <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1 2/5] mm/rmap: introduce and use hugetlb_remove_rmap() |
| |
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 05:39:35PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > Quoting from the cover letter: > > "We have hugetlb special-casing/checks in the callers in all cases either > way already in place: it doesn't make too much sense to call generic-looking > functions that end up doing hugetlb specific things from hugetlb > special-cases."
I'll take this one as an example: I think one goal (of my understanding of the mm community) is to make the generic looking functions keep being generic, dropping any function named as "*hugetlb*" if possible one day within that generic implementation. I said that in my previous reply.
Having that "*hugetlb*" code already in the code base may or may not be a good reason to further move it upward the stack.
Strong feelings? No, I don't have. I'm not knowledged enough to do so.
Thanks,
-- Peter Xu
| |