Re: [PATCH v7 3/8] mm/rmap: Split try_to_munlock from try_to_unmap

[John Hubbard]

On 3/30/21 8:56 PM, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 3/30/21 3:56 PM, Alistair Popple wrote:
> ...
> > > +1 for renaming "munlock*" items to "mlock*", where applicable. good grief.
> >
> > At least the situation was weird enough to prompt further investigation :)
> >
> > Renaming to mlock* doesn't feel like the right solution to me either though. I
> > am not sure if you saw me responding to myself earlier but I am thinking
> > renaming try_to_munlock() -> page_mlocked() and try_to_munlock_one() ->
> > page_mlock_one() might be better. Thoughts?
>
> Quite confused by this naming idea. Because: try_to_munlock() returns
> void, so a boolean-style name such as "page_mlocked()" is already not a
> good fit.
>
> Even more important, though, is that try_to_munlock() is mlock-ing the
> page, right? Is there some subtle point I'm missing? It really is doing
> an mlock to the best of my knowledge here. Although the kerneldoc
> comment for try_to_munlock() seems questionable too:
>
> /**
> * try_to_munlock - try to munlock a page
> * @page: the page to be munlocked
> *
> * Called from munlock code.  Checks all of the VMAs mapping the page
> * to make sure nobody else has this page mlocked. The page will be
> * returned with PG_mlocked cleared if no other vmas have it mlocked.
> */
>
> ...because I don't see where, in *this* routine, it clears PG_mlocked!
>
> Obviously we agree that a routine should be named based on what it does,
> rather than on who calls it. So I think that still leads to:
>
>      try_to_munlock() --> try_to_mlock()
>      try_to_munlock_one() --> try_to_mlock_one()
>
> Sorry if I'm missing something really obvious.

Actually, re-reading your and Jason's earlier points in the thread, I see
that I'm *not* missing anything, and we are actually in agreement about how
the code operates. OK, good!

Also, as you point out above, maybe the "try_" prefix is not really accurate
either, given how this works. So maybe we have arrived at something like:

    try_to_munlock() --> page_mlock() // or mlock_page()...
    try_to_munlock_one() --> page_mlock_one()



thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA