On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 03:10:39PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Wed 13-12-17 15:47:31, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 01:17:03PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Wed 13-12-17 15:07:33, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > > [...] > > > > The approach looks fine to me. > > > > > > > > But patch is rather large and hard to review. And how git mixed add/remove > > > > lines doesn't help too. Any chance to split it up further? > > > > > > I was trying to do that but this is a drop in replacement so it is quite > > > hard to do in smaller pieces. I've already put the allocation callback > > > cleanup into a separate one but this is about all that I figured how to > > > split. If you have any suggestions I am willing to try them out. > > > > "git diff --patience" seems generate more readable output for the patch. > > Hmm, I wasn't aware of this option. Are you suggesting I should use it > to general the patch to send? I don't know if it's better in general (it's not default after all), but it seems helps for this particular case. > > > > > One nitpick: I don't think 'chunk' terminology should go away with the > > > > patch. > > > > > > Not sure what you mean here. I have kept chunk_start, chunk_node, so I > > > am not really changing that terminology > > > > We don't really have chunks anymore, right? We still *may* have per-node > > batching, but.. > > > > Maybe just 'start' and 'current_node'? > > Ohh, I've read your response that you want to preserve the naming. I can > certainly do the rename. Yep, that's better. -- Kirill A. Shutemov -- 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>
