Re: [PATCH v2 03/28] mm: rename unlock_page_lruvec_irq and its variants

[David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)]

On 12/17/25 08:27, Qi Zheng wrote:
> From: Muchun Song <songmuchun@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> It is inappropriate to use folio_lruvec_lock() variants in conjunction
> with unlock_page_lruvec() variants, as this involves the inconsistent
> operation of locking a folio while unlocking a page. To rectify this, the
> functions unlock_page_lruvec{_irq, _irqrestore} are renamed to
> lruvec_unlock{_irq,_irqrestore}.
>
> Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@xxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Chen Ridong <chenridong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---

Nice cleanup

Acked-by: David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) <david@xxxxxxxxxx>

--
Cheers

David