On Thu 07-10-21 09:43:14, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 9:37 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> wrote: [...] > > OK, so there is no real authority or any real naming convention. You > > just hope that applications will behave so that the consumer of those > > names can make proper calls. Correct? > > > > In that case the same applies to numbers and I do not see any strong > > argument for strings other than it is more pleasing to a human eye when > > reading the file. And that doesn't sound like a strong argument to make > > the kernel more complicated. Functionally both approaches are equal from > > a practical POV. > > I don't think that's correct. Names like [anon:.bss], > [anon:dalvik-zygote space] and > [anon:dalvik-/system/framework/boot-core-icu4j.art] provide user with > actionable information about the use of that memory or the allocator > using it. No, none of the above is really actionable without a common understanding. Both dalvik* are a complete gibberish to me. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
