On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 3:40 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 14:36:03 -0600 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > or it is only something > > > meaningful for the internal code? > > > > This is how swappiness is interpreted. > > > > > if so, can we rename it to > > > something else? otherwise, it is quite confusing. > > > > Feel free to suggest something. > > It is confusing, swap_preference? It's still largely swappiness -- the original swappiness is twisted a bit around the corners (0, 1 and 200) to make it more suitable for internal use. I vote for __swappiness or lrugen_swappiness, which look ugly to me but it captures what this variable actually is, i.e., an overridden version of the original swappiness. And similar for lru_gen_mm_walk *walk vs mm_walk *walk. In other languages where polymorphism is supported, there are established naming conversions. In this patchset, I just used the same variable name when two things are closely related but distinguishable from the _contexts_ they are used.
