[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANN689G1EpuUMYj6c2iKf4Qoyo1ooDhQecm-Qgih5_f3S=Gd-w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 03:15:28 -0700
From: Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, mingo@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, aarcange@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rename NUMA fault handling functions
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 4:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 17:20 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> Having the function name indicate what the function is used
>> for makes the code a little easier to read. Furthermore,
>> the fault handling code largely consists of do_...._page
>> functions.
>
> I don't much care either way, but I was thinking walken might want to
> use something similar to do WSS estimation, in which case the NUMA name
> is just as wrong.
Right now my working set estimation only uses A bits, so let's not
make that a concern here.
I think the _numa names are a bit better than _prot_none, but still a
bit confusing. I don't have any great suggestions but I think there
should at least be a comment above pte_numa() that explains what the
numa ptes are (the comment within the function doesn't qualify as it
only explains how the numa ptes are different from the ones in
PROT_NONE vmas...)
--
Michel "Walken" Lespinasse
A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists