On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 06:01:58PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > And folio_mark_dirty() is doing more than just setting teh PG_dirty bit. In my > > equivalent change, as part of the contpte series, I've swapped set_page_dirty() > > for folio_mark_dirty(). > > Good catch, that should be folio_mark_dirty(). Let me send a fixup. > > (the difference in naming for both functions really is bad) It really is, and I don't know what to do about it. We need a function that literally just sets the flag. For every other flag, that's folio_set_FLAG. We can't use __folio_set_flag because that means "set the flag non-atomically". We need a function that does all of the work involved with tracking dirty folios. I chose folio_mark_dirty() to align with folio_mark_uptodate() (ie mark is not just 'set" but also "do some extra work"). But because we're converting from set_page_dirty(), the OBVIOUS rename is to folio_set_dirty(), which is WRONG. So we're in the part of the design space where the consistent naming and the-obvious-thing-to-do-is-wrong are in collision, and I do not have a good answer. Maybe we can call the first function _folio_set_dirty(), and we don't have a folio_set_dirty() at all? We don't have a folio_set_uptodate(), so there's some precedent there.
