| Message ID | 20240428100619.3332036-3-alexs@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/4] mm/ksm: rename mm_slot members to ksm_slot for better readability. | expand |
On 28.04.24 12:06, alexs@kernel.org wrote: > From: "Alex Shi (tencent)" <alexs@kernel.org> > > To distinguish ksm_mm_slot and mm_slot for better code readability, > rename mm_slot_cache as ksm_slot_cache. No function change. > > Signed-off-by: Alex Shi (tencent) <alexs@kernel.org> > Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> > --- > mm/ksm.c | 18 +++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/ksm.c b/mm/ksm.c > index 6efa33c48381..22d2132f83a4 100644 > --- a/mm/ksm.c > +++ b/mm/ksm.c > @@ -247,7 +247,7 @@ static struct ksm_scan ksm_scan = { > > static struct kmem_cache *rmap_item_cache; > static struct kmem_cache *stable_node_cache; > -static struct kmem_cache *mm_slot_cache; > +static struct kmem_cache *ksm_slot_cache; > > /* Default number of pages to scan per batch */ > #define DEFAULT_PAGES_TO_SCAN 100 > @@ -502,8 +502,8 @@ static int __init ksm_slab_init(void) > if (!stable_node_cache) > goto out_free1; > > - mm_slot_cache = KSM_KMEM_CACHE(ksm_mm_slot, 0); > - if (!mm_slot_cache) > + ksm_slot_cache = KSM_KMEM_CACHE(ksm_mm_slot, 0); > + if (!ksm_slot_cache) > goto out_free2; > > return 0; > @@ -518,10 +518,10 @@ static int __init ksm_slab_init(void) > > static void __init ksm_slab_free(void) > { > - kmem_cache_destroy(mm_slot_cache); > + kmem_cache_destroy(ksm_slot_cache); > kmem_cache_destroy(stable_node_cache); > kmem_cache_destroy(rmap_item_cache); > - mm_slot_cache = NULL; > + ksm_slot_cache = NULL; > } > > static __always_inline bool is_stable_node_chain(struct ksm_stable_node *chain) > @@ -1244,7 +1244,7 @@ static int unmerge_and_remove_all_rmap_items(void) > list_del(&ksm_slot->slot.mm_node); > spin_unlock(&ksm_mmlist_lock); > > - mm_slot_free(mm_slot_cache, ksm_slot); > + mm_slot_free(ksm_slot_cache, ksm_slot); > clear_bit(MMF_VM_MERGEABLE, &mm->flags); > clear_bit(MMF_VM_MERGE_ANY, &mm->flags); > mmdrop(mm); > @@ -2713,7 +2713,7 @@ static struct ksm_rmap_item *scan_get_next_rmap_item(struct page **page) > list_del(&ksm_slot->slot.mm_node); > spin_unlock(&ksm_mmlist_lock); > > - mm_slot_free(mm_slot_cache, ksm_slot); > + mm_slot_free(ksm_slot_cache, ksm_slot); > clear_bit(MMF_VM_MERGEABLE, &mm->flags); > clear_bit(MMF_VM_MERGE_ANY, &mm->flags); > mmap_read_unlock(mm); > @@ -2972,7 +2972,7 @@ int __ksm_enter(struct mm_struct *mm) > struct mm_slot *slot; > int needs_wakeup; > > - ksm_slot = mm_slot_alloc(mm_slot_cache); > + ksm_slot = mm_slot_alloc(ksm_slot_cache); Similarly, this makes the code more confusion. The pattern in khugepaged is similarly: mm_slot = mm_slot_alloc(mm_slot_cache); I don't think we want these renamings. E.g., "ksm_mm_slot_cache" might be a bit better than "mm_slot_cache". But then, we are in KSM code ... so I don't really see an improvement.
On 4/30/24 8:57 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> >> @@ -2972,7 +2972,7 @@ int __ksm_enter(struct mm_struct *mm) >> struct mm_slot *slot; >> int needs_wakeup; >> - ksm_slot = mm_slot_alloc(mm_slot_cache); >> + ksm_slot = mm_slot_alloc(ksm_slot_cache); > > Similarly, this makes the code more confusion. The pattern in khugepaged is similarly: > > mm_slot = mm_slot_alloc(mm_slot_cache); Could we rename it to khg_mm_slot_cache in khugepaged? > > I don't think we want these renamings. > > E.g., "ksm_mm_slot_cache" might be a bit better than "mm_slot_cache". But then, we are in KSM code ... so I don't really see an improvement. Thanks for comments and sorry for response late. yes, ksm_mm_slot_cache is better even in KSM code. As a cscope/tag dependency patient, this change could reduce much of confusing in name searching. And that's why a one-side change satisfies me. Yes, maybe better naming could make it more readable, any more further help? :) Thanks a lot! Alex
On 16.05.24 14:15, Alex Shi wrote: > > > On 4/30/24 8:57 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>> >>> @@ -2972,7 +2972,7 @@ int __ksm_enter(struct mm_struct *mm) >>> struct mm_slot *slot; >>> int needs_wakeup; >>> - ksm_slot = mm_slot_alloc(mm_slot_cache); >>> + ksm_slot = mm_slot_alloc(ksm_slot_cache); >> >> Similarly, this makes the code more confusion. The pattern in khugepaged is similarly: >> >> mm_slot = mm_slot_alloc(mm_slot_cache); > > Could we rename it to khg_mm_slot_cache in khugepaged? I don't see any sense in such renaming, sorry. This code resides in ksm.c/khugepaged.c respectively and at least for me is, therefore, quite clear.
diff --git a/mm/ksm.c b/mm/ksm.c index 6efa33c48381..22d2132f83a4 100644 --- a/mm/ksm.c +++ b/mm/ksm.c @@ -247,7 +247,7 @@ static struct ksm_scan ksm_scan = { static struct kmem_cache *rmap_item_cache; static struct kmem_cache *stable_node_cache; -static struct kmem_cache *mm_slot_cache; +static struct kmem_cache *ksm_slot_cache; /* Default number of pages to scan per batch */ #define DEFAULT_PAGES_TO_SCAN 100 @@ -502,8 +502,8 @@ static int __init ksm_slab_init(void) if (!stable_node_cache) goto out_free1; - mm_slot_cache = KSM_KMEM_CACHE(ksm_mm_slot, 0); - if (!mm_slot_cache) + ksm_slot_cache = KSM_KMEM_CACHE(ksm_mm_slot, 0); + if (!ksm_slot_cache) goto out_free2; return 0; @@ -518,10 +518,10 @@ static int __init ksm_slab_init(void) static void __init ksm_slab_free(void) { - kmem_cache_destroy(mm_slot_cache); + kmem_cache_destroy(ksm_slot_cache); kmem_cache_destroy(stable_node_cache); kmem_cache_destroy(rmap_item_cache); - mm_slot_cache = NULL; + ksm_slot_cache = NULL; } static __always_inline bool is_stable_node_chain(struct ksm_stable_node *chain) @@ -1244,7 +1244,7 @@ static int unmerge_and_remove_all_rmap_items(void) list_del(&ksm_slot->slot.mm_node); spin_unlock(&ksm_mmlist_lock); - mm_slot_free(mm_slot_cache, ksm_slot); + mm_slot_free(ksm_slot_cache, ksm_slot); clear_bit(MMF_VM_MERGEABLE, &mm->flags); clear_bit(MMF_VM_MERGE_ANY, &mm->flags); mmdrop(mm); @@ -2713,7 +2713,7 @@ static struct ksm_rmap_item *scan_get_next_rmap_item(struct page **page) list_del(&ksm_slot->slot.mm_node); spin_unlock(&ksm_mmlist_lock); - mm_slot_free(mm_slot_cache, ksm_slot); + mm_slot_free(ksm_slot_cache, ksm_slot); clear_bit(MMF_VM_MERGEABLE, &mm->flags); clear_bit(MMF_VM_MERGE_ANY, &mm->flags); mmap_read_unlock(mm); @@ -2972,7 +2972,7 @@ int __ksm_enter(struct mm_struct *mm) struct mm_slot *slot; int needs_wakeup; - ksm_slot = mm_slot_alloc(mm_slot_cache); + ksm_slot = mm_slot_alloc(ksm_slot_cache); if (!ksm_slot) return -ENOMEM; @@ -3040,7 +3040,7 @@ void __ksm_exit(struct mm_struct *mm) spin_unlock(&ksm_mmlist_lock); if (easy_to_free) { - mm_slot_free(mm_slot_cache, ksm_slot); + mm_slot_free(ksm_slot_cache, ksm_slot); clear_bit(MMF_VM_MERGE_ANY, &mm->flags); clear_bit(MMF_VM_MERGEABLE, &mm->flags); mmdrop(mm);