Re: [RFC PATCH 00/12] remove is_swap_[pte, pmd]() + non-swap confusion

Gregory Price
2025-10-27T23:33:02Z

On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 01:09:23PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> I'm not keen on is_non_present_entry(), it seems confusing again.
>

The confusion stems from `present` referring to the state of the hardware
PTE bits, instead of referring to the state of the entry.

But even if we're stuck with "non-present entry", it's still infinitely
more understandable (and teachable) than "non_swap_swap_entry".

So even if we never get to the point of replacing swp_entry_t, this is a
clear and obvious improvement.
~Gregory