From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Hubbard Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2021 13:23:30 -0800 Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2 net-next 3/4] net: introduce common dev_page_is_reserved() In-Reply-To: <20210130194459.37837-1-alobakin@pm.me> References: <20210127201031.98544-1-alobakin@pm.me> <20210127201031.98544-4-alobakin@pm.me> <20210129183907.2ae5ca3d@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <20210130154149.8107-1-alobakin@pm.me> <20210130110707.3122a360@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <20210130194459.37837-1-alobakin@pm.me> Message-ID: <752a57a6-3f45-8b9b-e8b1-939bc9450947@nvidia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org List-ID: On 1/30/21 11:45 AM, Alexander Lobakin wrote: > From: Jakub Kicinski > Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2021 11:07:07 -0800 > >> On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 15:42:29 +0000 Alexander Lobakin wrote: >>>> On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 20:11:23 +0000 Alexander Lobakin wrote: >>>>> + * dev_page_is_reserved - check whether a page can be reused for network Rx >>>>> + * @page: the page to test >>>>> + * >>>>> + * A page shouldn't be considered for reusing/recycling if it was allocated >>>>> + * under memory pressure or at a distant memory node. >>>>> + * >>>>> + * Returns true if this page should be returned to page allocator, false >>>>> + * otherwise. >>>>> + */ >>>>> +static inline bool dev_page_is_reserved(const struct page *page) >>>> >>>> Am I the only one who feels like "reusable" is a better term than >>>> "reserved". >>> >>> I thought about it, but this will need to inverse the conditions in >>> most of the drivers. I decided to keep it as it is. >>> I can redo if "reusable" is preferred. >> >> Naming is hard. As long as the condition is not a double negative it >> reads fine to me, but that's probably personal preference. >> The thing that doesn't sit well is the fact that there is nothing >> "reserved" about a page from another NUMA node.. But again, if nobody >> +1s this it's whatever... > > Agree on NUMA and naming. I'm a bit surprised that 95% of drivers > have this helper called "reserved" (one of the reasons why I finished > with this variant). > Let's say, if anybody else will vote for "reusable", I'll pick it for > v3. Definitely "reusable" seems better to me, and especially anything *other* than "reserved" is a good idea, IMHO. thanks, -- John Hubbard NVIDIA