Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] mm/hugetlb: refactor sysfs/sysctl interfaces

[David Hildenbrand]

On 05.11.25 00:06, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue,  4 Nov 2025 16:37:41 +0800 Hui Zhu <hui.zhu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > From: Hui Zhu <zhuhui@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > The hugetlb.c file has grown significantly and become difficult to
> > maintain. This patch series extracts the sysfs and sysctl interface
> > code into separate dedicated files to improve code organization.
> >
> > The refactoring includes:
> > - Patch 1: Extract sysfs interface into mm/hugetlb_sysfs.c
> > - Patch 2: Extract sysctl interface into mm/hugetlb_sysctl.c
> >
> > No functional changes are introduced in this series. The code is moved
> > as-is, with only minor formatting adjustments for code style
> > consistency. This should make future maintenance and enhancements to
> > the hugetlb subsystem easier.
> >
> > Testing: The patch series has been compile-tested and maintains the
> > same functionality as the original code.
>
> Thanks.
>
> >   MAINTAINERS           |   2 +
> >   mm/Makefile           |   2 +-
> >   mm/hugetlb.c          | 852 +-----------------------------------------
> >   mm/hugetlb_internal.h | 113 ++++++
> >   mm/hugetlb_sysctl.c   | 133 +++++++
> >   mm/hugetlb_sysfs.c    | 629 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   6 files changed, 887 insertions(+), 844 deletions(-)
> >   create mode 100644 mm/hugetlb_internal.h
> >   create mode 100644 mm/hugetlb_sysctl.c
> >   create mode 100644 mm/hugetlb_sysfs.c
>
> Seems a reasonable thing to do, although those who work on this code
> should have the final call.

If we limit the move to the core sysctl+sysfs code, leaving most of the 
actual logic in hugetlb.c, I assume there won't be too many conflicts in 
the near future.

Hoping for some comments from the hugetlb maintainers.

--
Cheers

David