Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 26 Feb 2018 15:50:35 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To:     Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 1/2] zsmalloc: introduce zs_huge_object() function
Message-ID: <20180226065035.GD12539@jagdpanzerIV>
References: <20180210082321.17798-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20180214055747.8420-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20180220012429.GA186771@rodete-desktop-imager.corp.google.com>
 <20180226054927.GA12539@jagdpanzerIV>
 <20180226055804.GD112402@rodete-desktop-imager.corp.google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180226055804.GD112402@rodete-desktop-imager.corp.google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.3 (2018-01-21)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On (02/26/18 14:58), Minchan Kim wrote:
[..]
> > Right. The changes are pretty trivial, that's why I kept then in
> > 2 simple patches. Besides, I didn't want to mix zsmalloc and zram
> > changes.
> 
> As I said earlier, it's not thing we usually do, at least, MM.
> Anyway, I don't want to insist on it because it depends each
> person's point of view what's the better for review, git-bisect.

Thanks :)

> > > 	size_t huge_size = _zs_huge_object(pool);
> > > 	..
> > > 	..
> > > 	if (comp_size >= huge_size)
> > > 		memcpy(dst, src, 4K);
> > 
> > Yes, can do. My plan was to keep it completely internally to zsmalloc.
> > Who knows, it might become smart enough one day to do something more
> > than just size comparison. Any reason you used that leading underscore
> 
> Let's do that in future if someone want it. :)

OK.

> > in _zs_huge_object()?
> 
> 
> Nope. It's just typo. Let's think better name.
> How about using zs_huge_size()?

hm, I think `huge_size' on it's own is a bit general and cryptic.
zs_huge_object_size() or zs_huge_class_size()?

	-ss