Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:9e8c:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id y12csp661999pxx; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 13:46:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwzsr/yO1LPtAvSaEzLSlqKTJ0JlIe1pPX2MqWadjxmZHEDtSh32jE++0i8bJ8WX89IqR4z X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:1a57:: with SMTP id j23mr910421ejf.291.1603917968834; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 13:46:08 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1603917968; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=QOjQyOAy+DowCI3rHyrdnk5HPsmoeemhnuKGaqAA7/dkWOfklE2Fo3sKlkZGMQosiZ DIO4geHCbWZieC2OqQw98hM5LNKgkUrY7sP6VbhMI7yZAIjwvzj6MfDDOpfKkYuIinKo Q+IUx62IiR5IElAM3kR+9e5DlUKikb9tfFi3LDHLg7vTsrEcVStXPivi3fzIR6Rg/vPk +I7vKG1F2ksBpQ8mFRRHZb/+PNquREluIAPCD6US/EOBSywh7emasuzLPS2f3+BVZLJ9 TTZyiEmzlQK7jCGQsMX3aZmP9uHK26EVkDQsqm8iSIAWHMfruS5wp7s9LOFHVsDufesO UPNQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=PUSGe3J/qpyb5gjYq/iuORJOCh7IUjTdzSGyiD/xoBo=; b=f+fsbC4lkuMFioURD6xJNbtNXyd43PD3MolxTi5xAH0go1wTYegUGF47GMfgfQclxO jMgxQVcrWZPV8ga8iiUTlzE0kvi0pua5kIWO8TBzJm/9nlzZ7ukyDvAwQY7010sHS5dL JzoyW+uVZoszSSM5VOSl2EN0c0xPfrmRBo8LKt4ZMGwouzFtldsIxzHebejqEnzK7zOt lstZTQNhSU81upjTM6ILtHGn/py7p367grZBbGWhXMAEE9Vc0Cb0/9DVNKcFLDsxBDJC CKpPxuGCatSJBzc1jDsPI00moVl4B24RV8eDEZww3oKb/DWBwINiSXautSCXf2qyG0jI 0A/A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=VH9ym3Lo; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=suse.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id x19si30189edq.122.2020.10.28.13.45.45; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 13:46:08 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=VH9ym3Lo; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=suse.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S370183AbgJ0TZz (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:25:55 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:36080 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2502262AbgJ0TX3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:23:29 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1603826608; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=PUSGe3J/qpyb5gjYq/iuORJOCh7IUjTdzSGyiD/xoBo=; b=VH9ym3Lod2k93UJK4FuakqAzgbWf2SWKxITD2fnaSinCjAJeoUknu4B3xS0xfrGnnQoiwy 0WMdWBGdcUDOcQMip4oSl+8W5yjbzTnu5gQEj1tCX4EU/wHcLYsKrWKNMHyEhlxLhtsFcX D8PIDVjDrSfWHxORGerSzJtiEufN6jw= Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C56B4ABB2; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 19:23:28 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 20:23:22 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Hui Su Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/oom_kill.c: remove the unmatched comments Message-ID: <20201027192322.GA20500@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20201027144529.GA3558@rlk> <20201027145814.GY20500@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20201027151156.GA4336@rlk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201027151156.GA4336@rlk> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue 27-10-20 23:11:56, Hui Su wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 03:58:14PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Tue 27-10-20 22:45:29, Hui Su wrote: > > > is_dump_unreclaim_slabs() just check whether nr_unreclaimable > > > slabs amount is greater than user memory, not match witch comment. > > > > As I've tried to explain, the comment is not explaining what the > > function does but how it should be used. It is not a kerneldoc afterall. > > So it is a good match. I can see how that might confuse somebody so I am > > not against changing this but the changelog shouldn't really be > > confusing on its own. What do you think about the following instead. > > > > Hi, Michal: > > Thanks for your fast reply, your changlog is much more accurate. > > And should i resend a patch V3 use the changlog below? Yes, just repost in reply to this email. With the updated changelog Feel free to add Acked-by: Michal Hocko > > Thanks. > > > " > > Comment for is_dump_unreclaim_slabs is not really clear whether it is > > meant to instruct how to use the function or whether it is an outdated > > information of the past implementation of the function. it doesn't realy > > help that is_dump_unreclaim_slabs is hard to grasp on its own. > > Rename the helper to should_dump_unreclaim_slabs which should make it > > clear what it is meant to do and drop the comment as the purpose should > > be pretty evident now. > > " > > > > -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs