On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 09:50:46 -0800 SeongJae Park <sj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 18:53:55 +0900 Honggyu Kim <honggyu.kim@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 11:43:47 -0800 SeongJae Park <sj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 17:24:33 +0900 Honggyu Kim <honggyu.kim@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi SeongJae, > > > > > > > > Thanks very much for the quick response. > > > > > > No problem, all owing to your kind report! > > > > > > > I think it looks great but I > > > > have some minor comments so please see my inline comments below. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Honggyu > > > > > > > > On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 16:29:21 -0800 SeongJae Park <sj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > The kernel-doc comment for 'struct damos_quota' describes how "effective > > > > > quota" is calculated, but does not explain what it is. Actually there > > > > > was an input[1] about it. Add the explanation on the comment. > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/damonitor/damo/issues/17#issuecomment-2497525043 > > > > > > > > > > Cc: Yunjeong Mun <yunjeong.mun@xxxxxx> > > > > > Cc: Honggyu Kim <honggyu.kim@xxxxxx> > > > > > Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > --- > > > > > include/linux/damon.h | 10 +++++++--- > > > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/damon.h b/include/linux/damon.h > > > > > index a67f2c4940e9..a01bfe2ff616 100644 > > > > > --- a/include/linux/damon.h > > > > > +++ b/include/linux/damon.h > > > > > @@ -193,9 +193,13 @@ struct damos_quota_goal { > > > > > * size quota is set, DAMON tries to apply the action only up to &sz bytes > > > > > * within &reset_interval. > > > > > * > > > > > - * Internally, the time quota is transformed to a size quota using estimated > > > > > - * throughput of the scheme's action. DAMON then compares it against &sz and > > > > > - * uses smaller one as the effective quota. > > > > > + * To convince the different types of quotas and goals, DAMON internally > > > > > + * converts those into one single size quota called "effective quota". DAMON > > > > > > > > Could we use "effective size quota" instead of "effective quota"? > > > > IMHO, it will better give an idea this is related to "esz" in the code, > > > > which means effective size. > > > > > > The above sentence is saying it as one single "size" quota, so calling it > > > "effective size quota" here feels like unnecessary duplicates of the word > > > ("size") to me. I'd like to keep this sentence as is if you don't really mind. > > > > Since the time or other goals are eventually transformed into a size > > quota, I thought the "effective size quota" makes sense but I won't > > stick to my term here. > > I understand your concern. But I want to make it not very strictly fixed and > well-defined term, but just somewhat understandable with common sense and given > context, for flexibility and conciseness. So unless this is really makes it > difficult to understand what it means even with common senses and the context > I'd like to keep current form. > > I believe your answer to the above question is "no" since you mentioned you > won't stick to your term. Please let me know if I'm misreading you. OK. I'm fine with the changes with this patch. I won't ask more changes. > > > > We originally asked this question about the term "effective" itself as > > we didn't find an explanation what "effective" means actually in the > > doc. It'd be better to have more explicit explanation as well. > > I think this patch makes the point pretty explicit, so my humble brain is bit > confused what "more explicit" really means. Could you please clarify what > changes you want to be added? Nevermind, your changes here with some grammar and typo fixes are enough for this patch. Thanks, Honggyu > > Thanks, > SJ > > [...]
