From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95139C77B7A for ; Thu, 25 May 2023 20:21:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4QRzwW5ZHYz3fGf for ; Fri, 26 May 2023 06:21:31 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=oiC2XGhN; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org (client-ip=139.178.84.217; helo=dfw.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=rppt@kernel.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=oiC2XGhN; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4QRzvW6v1Bz3cfp for ; Fri, 26 May 2023 06:20:39 +1000 (AEST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE92864A34; Thu, 25 May 2023 20:20:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D613BC433D2; Thu, 25 May 2023 20:20:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1685046036; bh=TRdhRXxXUIYfs640uIn+I4Rf6UAXCv8idpkcYdsSebM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=oiC2XGhNWUAmWE7pr8r3QtJ9JQsEo/jXvve3lXs2r5Y+W4R2mTSVXer6rhbIqd0H3 uoSQkJ728HLdXkJmf2eWWiJHTRm/fGQOsi2eZMGN8iMwau2U+ioJb0W4RoKYGYtykh z9scTeHJfdOUnqeX313qP2xIMkwidI5DxymtOtruiJkZ/HiGGdvi3+NdefCU8HC/4L yVF6ukcziPPo5ghUZkvreoJAGRzTQdLIctyd1RS1O+YIm3/yAJVKFl1SAT+U6nvVPE TUmcZj1oUZgh7b4Odb9/HzteZyqvh1+JrTl0ADJm08qL98dpyZZ8OeR78PQJMngFPN 0x/EvMWBkU0Qw== Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 23:20:11 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: Vishal Moola Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/34] mm: Add PAGE_TYPE_OP folio functions Message-ID: <20230525202011.GZ4967@kernel.org> References: <20230501192829.17086-1-vishal.moola@gmail.com> <20230501192829.17086-2-vishal.moola@gmail.com> <20230525085555.GV4967@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-openrisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-csky@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, Matthew Wilcox , loongarch@lists.linux.dev, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Andrew Morton , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 10:00:23AM -0700, Vishal Moola wrote: > On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 1:56 AM Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 12:27:56PM -0700, Vishal Moola (Oracle) wrote: > > > No folio equivalents for page type operations have been defined, so > > > define them for later folio conversions. > > > > Can you please elaborate why would we need folios for page table descriptors? > > Thanks for the review! > > These macros are for callers that care about the page type, i.e. Table and > Buddy. Aside from accounting for those cases, the page tables don't use folios. > These are more for the cleanliness of those callers. But why using folio APIs for PageType will be cleaner than using page APIs? Do you have an example? -- Sincerely yours, Mike.