On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 12:05:28AM +0800, Yin Fengwei wrote: > zero_user_folio_segments() has same function as zero_user_segments(). > but take folio as parameter. Update folio_zero_segments(), > folio_zero_segment() and folio_zero_range() to use it. If we were going to do something like this, then it should be folio_zero_segments(), not zero_user_folio_segments(). But I don't understand the advantage to adding this right now. We're adding a new function that does exactly the same thing as zero_user_segments() for no real benefit that I can see. My plan was always to eventually kill off zero_user_segment() zero_user_segments() and zero_user(), and then move the implementation of zero_user_segments() to be the implementation of folio_zero_segments(). But we still have ~100 calls to those three functions, so we can't do that yet. If you're looking for something to do, how about batching calls to page_remove_rmap() in try_to_unmap_one()? That's a pretty hairy function, but I think that you'll see similar gains to the ones you saw with page_add_file_rmap() since it's manipulating the same counters.
