[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJuCfpG5Ua7C4usJGEqTm6_UUd6VyRd0BsPgT97LWOzjb4Ry+g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2021 15:59:48 -0700
From: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Tim Murray <timmurray@...gle.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: introduce process_reap system call
On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 5:44 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 2:45 PM Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 11:51:36AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 11:26 AM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > > Also, please consider removing all mention of the word "reap" from the
> > > > user API. For better or for worse, "reap" in UNIX refers to what
> > > > happens when a dead task gets wait()ed. I sincerely wish I could go
> > > > back in time and gently encourage whomever invented that particular
> > > > abomination to change their mind, but my time machine doesn't work.
> > >
> > > I see. Thanks for the note. How about process_mem_release() and
> > > replacing reap with release everywhere?
> >
> > I don't quite understand the objection. This syscall works on tasks
> > that are at the end of their life, right? Isn't something like
> > process_mreap() establishing exactly the mental link we want here?
> > Release is less descriptive for what this thing is to be used for.
>
> For better or for worse, "reap" means to make a zombie pid go away.
> From the description, this new operation takes a dying process (not
> necessarily a zombie yet) and aggressively frees its memory. This is
> a different optioneration.
>
> How about "free_dying_process_memory"?
process_mreap sounds definitely better and in line with names like
process_madvise. So maybe we can use it?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists