On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 03:51:51PM +0100, Joao Martins wrote: > On 6/13/22 07:35, Muchun Song wrote: > > It it inconvenient to mention the feature of optimizing vmemmap pages associated > > with HugeTLB pages when communicating with others since there is no specific or > > abbreviated name for it when it is first introduced. Let us give it a name HVO > > (HugeTLB Vmemmap Optimization) from now. > > > > Just thought I would throw this suggestion, even though I am probably too late. > Not too late, we are still discussing the name. > I find the term "vmemmap deduplication" more self-explanatory (at least for me) > to refer to your technique ,and similarly s/optimize/dedup. Or vmemmap tail page > deduplication (too verbose maybe) because really that's what this optimization is all > about. OTOH it would slightly deviate from what maybe established now > in hugetlb code. > Well, I have looked up this word "deduplication" which refers to a method of eliminating a dataset’s redundant data. At least I agree with you "deduplication" is more expressive for my technique. So I am thinking of renaming "HVO" to "HVD ( HugeTLB Vmemmap Deduplication)". In this series (patch 6), I have renamed hugetlb_vmemmap_alloc/free to hugetlb_vmemmmap_optimize/restore. I am also thinking of replacing it to: hugetlb_vmemmmap_deduplicate vs hugetlb_vmemmmap_duplicate. Many other places in hugetlb_vmemmap.c use "optimize" word, maybe most of them do not need to be changed since "deduplication" is also a __optimization__ technique. Hi Mike and David: What your opinion on this? I want to hear some thoughts from you. THanks.
