Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] mm: switch deferred split shrinker to list_lru

[David Hildenbrand (Arm)]

On 3/20/26 17:07, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 08:21:21AM +0100, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
>> Of course :) If list_lru lock helpers would be the right thing to do, it
>> might be better placed in this series.
> 
> I think this is slightly more promising. See below. The callsites in
> huge_memory.c look nicer. But the double folio_nid() and folio_memcg()
> lookups (when the caller needs them too) are kind of unfortunate; and
> it feels like a lot of API for 4 callsites. Thoughts?

I like that. Could we just put the implementation inline into
list_lru.h, such that the compiler could try reusing nid+memcg?

[...]

>  			__list_lru_add(&deferred_split_lru, l,
>  				       &folio->_deferred_list,
>  				       folio_nid(folio), folio_memcg(folio));
> -			list_lru_unlock_irqrestore(l, &flags);
> -			rcu_read_unlock();
> +			folio_list_lru_unlock_irqrestore(folio, l, &flags);

I guess it would look even cleaner if we would wrap the __list_lru_add()
that needs the memcg + nid in an own helper.

These are the only remaining users of memcg+nid, right?

-- 
Cheers,

David