From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-171.mta0.migadu.com (out-171.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.171]) (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 E722038B130 for ; Wed, 13 May 2026 07:10:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.171 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778656253; cv=none; b=s0lGAvmQDucf9jr9QJB1v6abnGP+uxRLnbOPezfyIODcZTWqhXF9exolmsKqAe8RZE8zEl/DozZ/aKZ0lc3E3f4BLkp1GW2QoDoViL1ejc7RUnlBhl9HyHt9DvinvdNuXyMQj2fE31ViJS2WXLIwS9zcxEdI5Zl7rcG9k/0+JUA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778656253; c=relaxed/simple; bh=00gL5i2nEnvhB910ez7tx4pDjiSz/kG7HieLhYc9g5Y=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=cEvvP3xzZz38LX1OL2K2XYsa5Ao+3xCYNRZUsecuyXtrKrLhakRYi9aVkAQhvNyMCUxHNZqiGmyHsCjEcjgfEIvdPS5p33NRP8rYdJYJuGSsUTGmRUvg7gwTNn2nkyQxKb8H9ffcFdtc6AeOcYSKcxjmoCHWRwgMZmq//+cBXjA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=F3p2boEX; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.171 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="F3p2boEX" Date: Wed, 13 May 2026 15:10:42 +0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1778656249; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=D8/96t3AS4EVMM7ngllBmEIAjLU8QFYVrfM+jWZ/9mk=; b=F3p2boEX6pGL9l/lv1/6QFbtm727U5Z2JiMUU1imi+DkQg4S4WR+4+FxLe81IGT1uCGZrj iqJXi4ZkeqDrqszGvv7733yF1IC8SSr/lZYDbWup10ob65hTJxwyadv+OpACjnemBkg4xP g1U3VSTOFAXMUgjzxFG9cnOcz8WWnp0= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Baoquan He To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, chrisl@kernel.org, usama.arif@linux.dev, baohua@kernel.org, kasong@tencent.com, nphamcs@gmail.com, shikemeng@huaweicloud.com, youngjun.park@lge.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] mm/swap: rename mm/page_io.c to mm/swap_io.c Message-ID: References: <20260512104201.716213-1-baoquan.he@linux.dev> <20260512104201.716213-2-baoquan.he@linux.dev> 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=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On 05/12/26 at 10:21pm, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 06:41:59PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > > Codes in mm/page_io.c are only related to swap io, it has > > nothing to do with other page io. > > That is true. At the same time it also (mostly) isn't about all swap > I/O, but specifically about the block based I/O backend for swap, and > secondarily a little bit about helpers for the swsusp I/O to the swap > file, with a little bit generic swap I/O wrappers thrown in. > > So the new new isn't grest either. And I'd rather wait with this until "So the new isn't great either." ? Take it easy, I can feel this abstraction falls into your area? > we can nicely split stuff out - the rest of this series is a good step > toward that, and my swap_activate series is another. After that we > should be able to stop creating swap_extent structures for > SWP_FS_OPS-based I/O, and contain struct swap_extent with the bio code > and actually create a coherent abstraction. This will require moving > a bit more code around, though. My preference for the resulting name > would be swap-block.c or swap-bio.c, but that's up for future > discussion. > > Can we just skip this for now? Yes, I agree with you, and the swap_extent creating thing sounds great, look forward to seeing it. I will drop this patch 1/3 in v7.