On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 02:37:01PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 09:04:15AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > Obviously I found the new names clearer but I was thinking a lot at the > > > time about mapped vs unmapped due to looking closely at both reclaim and > > > [f|m]advise functions at the time. I found it mildly irksome to switch > > > between the semantics of file/anon when looking at the vmstat updates. > > > > I can see that. It all depends on whether you consider mapping state > > or page type the more fundamental attribute, and coming from the > > mapping perspective those new names make sense as well. > > > > From a reclaim perspective, I consider the mapped state to be more > important. This is particularly true when the advise calls are taken > into account. For example, madvise unmaps the pages without affecting > memory residency (distinct from RSS) without aging. fadvise ignores mapped > pages so the mapped state is very important for advise hints. Similarly, > the mapped state can affect how the pages are aged as mapped pages affect > slab scan rates and incur TLB flushes on unmap. I guess I've been thinking > about mapped/unmapped a lot recently which pushed me towards distinct naming. > > > However, that leaves the disconnect between the enum name and what we > > print to userspace. I find myself having to associate those quite a > > lot to find all the sites that modify a given /proc/vmstat item, and > > that's a bit of a pain if the names don't match. > > > > I was tempted to rename userspace what is printed to vmstat as well but > worried about breaking tools that parse it. > > > 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 have thought it from reclaim perspective for a long time so I tempted to change the naming like new one but there is no big justification for that. In this chance, I vote new name. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>