On 07/13/2016 07:50 AM, Balbir Singh wrote:

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 12:18:05PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 09:06:04PM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:

quoted

quoted

diff --git a/Documentation/cgroup-v1/memory.txt b/Documentation/cgroup-v1/memory.txt
index b14abf217239..946e69103cdd 100644
--- a/Documentation/cgroup-v1/memory.txt
+++ b/Documentation/cgroup-v1/memory.txt

@@ -267,11 +267,11 @@ When oom event notifier is registered, event will be delivered.
    Other lock order is following:
    PG_locked.
    mm->page_table_lock
-       zone->lru_lock
+       zone_lru_lock

zone_lru_lock is a little confusing, can't we just call it
node_lru_lock?

It's a matter of perspective. People familiar with the VM already expect
a zone lock so will be looking for it. I can do a rename if you insist
but it may not actually help.

I don't want to insist, but zone_ in the name can be confusing, as to
leading us to think that the lru_lock is still in the zone

On the other hand, it suggests that the argument of the function is a 
zone. Passing a zone to something called "node_lru_lock()" would be more 
confusing to me. Also it's mostly a convenience wrapper to ease the 
transition, whose usage will likely diminish over time.

If the rest of the reviewers are fine with, we don't need to rename

Yes, it's not worth the trouble.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>