Re: [PATCH v3 13/18] mm/memcg: Add folio_memcg_lock() and folio_memcg_unlock()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed 07-07-21 16:10:49, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
[...]
> > I do not really want to be annoying here but I have to say that I like
> > the conversion by previous patches much better than this wrapper
> > approach as mentioned during the previous review already. If you have
> > some reasons to stick with this approach for this particular case then
> > make it explicit in the changelog.
> 
> OK, I can point to the number of callers as a reason to keep the
> wrappers in place.  I intended to just do the conversion here, but
> seeing the number of callers made me reconsider.

OK, fair enough. My worry is that we will have this lingering for way
too long. People simply tend to copy code... Anyway, please add a
comment warning that the wrapper shouldn't be used in any new code at
least.

Thanks!
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [Monitors]

  Powered by Linux