[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YquuXIaBM98oTyD9@monkey>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2022 15:27:40 -0700
From: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
To: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Cc: Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>, david@...hat.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
corbet@....net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] mm: hugetlb_vmemmap: introduce the name HVO
On 06/16/22 11:28, Muchun Song wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 03:51:51PM +0100, Joao Martins wrote:
> > On 6/13/22 07:35, Muchun Song wrote:
> > > It it inconvenient to mention the feature of optimizing vmemmap pages associated
> > > with HugeTLB pages when communicating with others since there is no specific or
> > > abbreviated name for it when it is first introduced. Let us give it a name HVO
> > > (HugeTLB Vmemmap Optimization) from now.
> > >
> >
> > Just thought I would throw this suggestion, even though I am probably too late.
> >
>
> Not too late, we are still discussing the name.
>
> > I find the term "vmemmap deduplication" more self-explanatory (at least for me)
> > to refer to your technique ,and similarly s/optimize/dedup. Or vmemmap tail page
> > deduplication (too verbose maybe) because really that's what this optimization is all
> > about. OTOH it would slightly deviate from what maybe established now
> > in hugetlb code.
> >
>
> Well, I have looked up this word "deduplication" which refers to a method of
> eliminating a dataset’s redundant data. At least I agree with you "deduplication"
> is more expressive for my technique. So I am thinking of renaming "HVO" to "HVD (
> HugeTLB Vmemmap Deduplication)". In this series (patch 6), I have renamed
> hugetlb_vmemmap_alloc/free to hugetlb_vmemmmap_optimize/restore. I am also
> thinking of replacing it to:
>
> hugetlb_vmemmmap_deduplicate vs hugetlb_vmemmmap_duplicate.
>
> Many other places in hugetlb_vmemmap.c use "optimize" word, maybe most of them do
> not need to be changed since "deduplication" is also a __optimization__ technique.
>
> Hi Mike and David:
>
> What your opinion on this? I want to hear some thoughts from you.
I can understand Joao's preference for deduplication. However, I can
also understand just using the term optimization. IMO, neither is far
superior to the other. It is mostly a matter of personal preference.
My preference would be to leave it as named in this series unless
someone has a strong preference for changing.
--
Mike Kravetz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists