From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Balbir Singh Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] memory controller background reclamation Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:26:05 +0530 Message-ID: <474A43D5.8020600@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <47464D04.2030906@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20071126024710.8F4ED1CF411@siro.lan> <474A36C3.80509@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: balbir-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <474A36C3.80509-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: YAMAMOTO Takashi Cc: containers-qjLDD68F18O7TbgM5vRIOg@public.gmane.org, minoura-jCdQPDEk3idL9jVzuh4AOg@public.gmane.org List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org Balbir Singh wrote: > YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote: >>>> + int batch_count = 128; /* XXX arbitrary */ >>> Could we define and use something like MEM_CGROUP_BATCH_COUNT for now? >>> Later we could consider and see if it needs to be tunable. numbers are >>> hard to read in code. >> although i don't think it makes sense, i can do so if you prefer. >> > > Using numbers like 128 make the code unreadable. I prefer something > like MEM_CGROUP_BATCH_COUNT since its more readable than 128. If we ever > propagate batch_count to other dependent functions, I'd much rather do > it with a well defined name. > I just checked we already have FORCE_UNCHARGE_BATCH, we could just rename and re-use it. -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL