On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 01:45:48PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 11:34:45AM +0200, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > Use PG_dropbehind instead of PG_reclaim and remove PG_reclaim. > > I was hoping we'd end up with the name PG_reclaim instead of the name > PG_dropbehind. PG_reclaim is a better name for this functionality. I got burned by re-using the name with MAX_ORDER redefinition. I guess it is less risky as it is less used, but still... Anyway, it can be done with a patch on top of the patchset. We must get rid of current PG_reclaim first. -- Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
