Re: [RFC] mm: use folio_expected_ref_count() helper for reference counting

[Shivank Garg]

On 6/10/2025 1:44 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jun 2025 20:51:00 +0100
> Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 03:31:40PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On June 9, 2025 3:21:20 PM EDT, Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:  
>>>> On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 05:08:07PM +0000, Shivank Garg wrote:  
>>>>> Replace open-coded folio reference count calculations with the
>>>>> folio_expected_ref_count() helper to improve code maintainability
>>>>> and reduce duplication.  
>>>>
>>>> If it needs this much additional commentary, perhaps it's not actually
>>>> clearer?  
>>>
>>> I don't know. I tend to over explain as I rather make it totally
>>> obvious what is happening. I wouldn't say excessive commentary is
>>> necessarily a sign that it's not clearer.  
>>
>> That was a Socratic question, not for you to answer.
>>
>> My opinion is that the extra commentary is obfuscatory and should be
>> removed.
> 
> 
> Ah, sorry, your response wasn't clear ;-)

Thank you Willy, Steve for the discussion.
Fair point about extra comments, I'll remove them.

Thanks,
Shivank