linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 18/34] mm: rename NR_ANON_PAGES to NR_ANON

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20160715153554.f9d12360e31441b720d6a6b1@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Fri, 15 Jul 2016 15:35:54 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
Cc:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/34] mm: rename NR_ANON_PAGES to NR_ANON_MAPPED

On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 11:46:05 +0100 Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 02:13:43PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 13 Jul 2016 14:37:01 +0100 Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > > I don't care strongly enough to cause a respin of half the series, and
> > > > it's not your problem that I waited until the last revision went into
> > > > mmots to review and comment. But if you agreed to a revert, would you
> > > > consider tacking on a revert patch at the end of the series?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > In this case, I'm going to ask the other people on the cc for a
> > > tie-breaker. If someone else prefers the old names then I'm happy for
> > > your patch to be applied on top with my ack instead of respinning the
> > > whole series.
> > > 
> > > Anyone for a tie breaker?
> > 
> > I am aggressively undecided.  I guess as it's a bit of a 51/49
> > situation, the "stay with what people are familiar with" benefit tips the
> > balance toward the legacy names?
> > 
> 
> I still can't decide. It's currently still a draw in terms of naming. If
> you're worried, use the old naming. It wouldn't be the first time I
> thought a name was odd.

Well I dunno.  We can leave the series as-is for now and we can merge
the rename-it-back patch sometime during the next -rc cycle if we find
that people are running around in confusion and tumbling out of high
windows.