lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] rename NUMA fault handling functions

* Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 10/19/2012 07:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 17:20 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >>Having the function name indicate what the function is used
> >>for makes the code a little easier to read. Furthermore,
> >>the fault handling code largely consists of do_...._page
> >>functions.
> >
> > I don't much care either way, but I was thinking walken
> > might want to use something similar to do WSS estimation, in
> > which case the NUMA name is just as wrong.
>
> That's a good point. I had not considered other uses of the
> same code.

Renaming the functions for more clarity still makes sense IMO:
we could give it a _wss or _working_set prefix/postfix?

Thanks,

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-10-19 23:41    [W:0.055 / U:2.292 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site