On 2023/7/24 4:37, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 11:25:38AM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote: >> @@ -582,9 +582,9 @@ static inline void mem_cgroup_protection(struct mem_cgroup *root, >> /* >> * There is no reclaim protection applied to a targeted reclaim. >> * We are special casing this specific case here because >> - * mem_cgroup_protected calculation is not robust enough to keep >> - * the protection invariant for calculated effective values for >> - * parallel reclaimers with different reclaim target. This is >> + * mem_cgroup_calculate_protection calculation is not robust enough >> + * to keep the protection invariant for calculated effective values >> + * for parallel reclaimers with different reclaim target. This is >> * especially a problem for tail memcgs (as they have pages on LRU) >> * which would want to have effective values 0 for targeted reclaim >> * but a different value for external reclaim. > > This reads a little awkwardly now. How about: > > * We are special casing this specific case here because > - * mem_cgroup_protected calculation is not robust enough to keep > + * mem_cgroup_calculate_protection is not robust enough to keep Sounds better. Will do it in v2. Thanks.
