Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm/mlock: implement folio_mlock_step() using folio_pte_batch()

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 11:31:17AM +0800, Lance Yang wrote:
>  {
> -	unsigned int count, i, nr = folio_nr_pages(folio);
> -	unsigned long pfn = folio_pfn(folio);
> -	pte_t ptent = ptep_get(pte);

Please don't move type declarations later in the function.  Just because
you can doesn't mean you should.

> -	if (!folio_test_large(folio))
> +	if (likely(!folio_test_large(folio)))
>  		return 1;

How likely is this now?  How likely will it be in two years time?
Does this actually make any difference in either code generation or
performance?