On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 10:32:02AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Wed 30-06-21 05:00:29, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > These are the folio equivalents of lock_page_memcg() and > > unlock_page_memcg(). Reimplement them as wrappers. > > Is there any reason why you haven't followed the same approach as for > the previous patches. I mean callers can call page_folio and then > lock_page_memcg wrapper shouldn't be really needed. At this point in the patch series there are ~20 places which call lock_page_memcg(). I think it makes more sense to leave the wrapper in place, and then we can remove the wrapper once all/most of these places are converted to use folios. There are another 5 conversions already in the patch series, eg here: https://git.infradead.org/users/willy/pagecache.git/commitdiff/a41c942c8e4b41df30be128ef6998ff1849fa36a > 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.
