Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-8327-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 13:23:14 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>,
	Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/17] writeback: Factor should_writeback_folio() out
 of write_cache_pages()
Message-ID: <20231221122314.GD17956@lst.de>
References: <20231218153553.807799-1-hch@lst.de> <20231218153553.807799-9-hch@lst.de> <20231221112206.f6biqpkpwl6w64mo@quack3>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231221112206.f6biqpkpwl6w64mo@quack3>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)

On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 12:22:06PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > +static bool should_writeback_folio(struct address_space *mapping,
> > +		struct writeback_control *wbc, struct folio *folio)
> > +{
> 
> I'd call this function folio_prepare_writeback() or something like that to
> make it clearer that this function is not only about the decision whether
> we want to write folio or not but we also clear the dirty bit &
> writeprotect the folio in page tables.

Fine with me.  I'll wait for willy to chime in if he has a strong
preference.