On 2/1/23 13:38, Marco Elver wrote: > 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). +1, also wasn't happy that "slab" is being used out of the usual context here :) Thanks
