On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 at 20:06, Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 12:59 PM Alexander Potapenko <glider@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 9:50 PM <andrey.konovalov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > From: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Give better names to slab-related global variables: change "depot_" > > > prefix to "slab_" to point out that these variables are related to > > > stack depot slabs. > > > > I started asking myself if the word "slab" is applicable here at all. > > The concept of preallocating big chunks of memory to amortize the > > costs belongs to the original slab allocator, but "slab" has a special > > meaning in Linux, and we might be confusing people by using it in a > > different sense. > > What do you think? > > Yes, I agree that using this word is a bit confusing. > > Not sure what be a good alternative though. "Region", "block", > "collection", and "chunk" come to mind, but they don't reflect the > purpose/usage of these allocations as good as "slab". Although it's > possible that my perception as affected by overly frequently looking > at the slab allocator internals :) > > Do you have a suggestion of a better word? I'd vote for "pool" and "chunk(s)" (within that pool).
