On 8/1/24 11:35 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 12:13:04PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: >> On (24/07/31 12:14), Alex Shi wrote: >>>> A bit of a different thing, still documentation related tho: do >>>> we want to do something about comments that mention page_lock in >>>> zsmalloc.c? >>> >>> Good question! >>> >>> There are some comments mentioned about the page_lock in the file, but missed >>> in the header of file, so how about the following adding: >> >> And e.g. things like >> >> `The page locks trylock_zspage got will be released by __free_zspage.` >> >> Should this (and the rest) spell "zpdesc locks" or something? Or do >> we still want to refer to it as "page lock"? > > pages do not have locks. folios have locks. zpdesc sounds like it has > a lock too. Thanks willy and Sergey's suggestion! If I understand right, we'd better to update all subpages calling in the file by zpdesc? Yes that's a bit more fit the code. So, is the following new patch fine? =========
