From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6B7014A8B for ; Sat, 8 Feb 2025 01:08:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738976902; cv=none; b=Ti3N4b/ViToPWdmETyoYIBys/jvK6MMMTvqgEOYkF/r2vvw2ippIsbK3W7NwnFyfXwSV28UaYAqd4/jwq5xVPGMhRW7IhLPB6bycjstE196716Q4PCCjdl5T99F2IK9lHfnkoIvD6A5yZEKLqeid8sL0EvvY4GgJzrWRqLXJzvo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738976902; c=relaxed/simple; bh=bD9rOJNb+vnxn0lB0NJAYojp/zAwIuve72wDkO8PC5U=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Q/dHgGoa+prnM80tdDjgqUtrLKLMPmHR/Tp7hXQ6eLUn5UtKymicD377VgBAkn6K/5RC4N2POm38x6w0GPDvTVsfQ+MrDon9wkyFLeXzhg1Qc0XirxNQJYtNW54Gmi8I8Yp+mnqsg9DNzxCl2S9C8oqOEliLCcAMbpCQt10aSLo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=Ny0MU1D8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Ny0MU1D8" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1738976899; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=OtfwWOpr+HlJ/Tgq015gNWog2ySCjFtiPCDlievL+/8=; b=Ny0MU1D8+2oKCXLIrkeiGda+rHqC8gKunMqUkv4t8KjK9qAsjHccUfJlIhNef4WEKTiva8 BMb/pa8Cb06GmLwkNcUrf0eeii8T8MRmlKOvMuSFGULwK+8BAdqBl9cOp7i+0eONziWw59 48+ZmkQ2X2zQjGu+0xXqV2b5kgPi8js= Received: from mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-623-KVbfTAv_P5G4VeEzMLVtEA-1; Fri, 07 Feb 2025 20:08:18 -0500 X-MC-Unique: KVbfTAv_P5G4VeEzMLVtEA-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: KVbfTAv_P5G4VeEzMLVtEA Received: from mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25B2E180056F; Sat, 8 Feb 2025 01:08:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.72.112.20]) by mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9FD130001AB; Sat, 8 Feb 2025 01:08:15 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2025 09:08:11 +0800 From: Baoquan He To: Kairui Song Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, chrisl@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] Tiny cleanup and improvements about SWAP code Message-ID: References: <20250205092721.9395-1-bhe@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.4 On 02/07/25 at 05:36pm, Kairui Song wrote: > On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 5:27 PM Baoquan He wrote: > > > > These are all made during reviewing and learning below patchset from > > Kairui. > > Thanks, I've noticed some obsolete comments and code, currently > refactoring many parts so some of the functions would be just gone > someday. Thanks a lot for reviewing, Kairui. I have a queued patchset to refactor the old hdd/cluster code, it could be made about 2 years ago. Then I heard you and Chris's presentation in LPC in last fall, and your later rework patchset, just began to notice the big change in swap code which is not what I knew. Sorry, didn't know you are still refactoring the code, so will stop touching swap code, look forward to seeing your new refactoring patches. I will keep an eye so that I can follow the step to update my knowledge about swap code. > But this surely cleans things up and is good to have, refactoring will > take much longer time to happen. Thanks again. Please help add me to CC when you post, I am interested in the new change. > > With the V2 update of "mm/swapfile.c: update the code comment above > swap_count_continued()": > > Reviewed-by: Kairui Song > > > [PATCH v3 00/13] mm, swap: rework of swap allocator locks > > BTW, I noticed most patches here are patching legacy code, and not > directly related to that series. > Just to clarify, so people won't need to worry about missing "Fixes:" > or things like that :) LOL, right, at least people following the recent change of swap won't misunderstand.