Re: [PATCH] mm/doc: Replace isolate_lru_page with folio_isolate_lru

[Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>]

On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 01:58:09PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 03:10:07PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 11:02:11AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > > Kuan-Ying Lee <Kuan-Ying.Lee@mediatek.com> writes:
> > > 
> > > > Since we introduce folio, replace isolate_lru_page() with
> > > > folio_isolate_lru().
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Kuan-Ying Lee <Kuan-Ying.Lee@mediatek.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  Documentation/mm/page_migration.rst | 6 +++---
> > > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > This seems like a good patch to copy to linux-mm - done now.
> > > 
> > > The patch perhaps is a closer match to what's in linux-next, but it
> > > seems that, if we're going to update this document, we should reflect
> > > the use folios throughout?
> > 
> > Most of the current users of migrate_pages() still use isolate_lru_page()
> > so I think that updating page_migration.rst to folios is premature.
> > But when we do the update it also should include the translations.
> 
> It's a slim majority -- 9 of isolate_lru_pages() and 7 of
> folio_isolate_lru().  I don't think that changing the documentation is
> premature; we should document the functions we want people to use.
> I'd be surprised if isolate_lru_pages() still existed in six months.

That's a bit of a problem when documentation describes how things are done
rather than how to do them, but I don't have a strong feeling about
updating the docs while we are still in the transition period or postponing
it until e.g. isolate_lru_page() is gone.

But in any case, this should be much more comprehensive update rather than
replacing two occurrences out of three in a single file.

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.