Message-ID: <00da0073-745c-ddef-5e9d-960346adef73@suse.cz>
Date:   Wed, 8 Feb 2023 17:43:55 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.7.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/18] lib/stackdepot: rename slab variables
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@gmail.com>
Cc:     Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        andrey.konovalov@linux.dev, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com,
        Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
References: <cover.1675111415.git.andreyknvl@google.com>
 <fc73ab8b1469d476363a918cbdfe28e1388c043a.1675111415.git.andreyknvl@google.com>
 <CAG_fn=WxZf_kfn8-G8hvoxvUT8-NKNkXuP5Tg2bZp=zzMXOByw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+fCnZdOFOUF6FEPkg2aU46rKYz8L9UAos4sRhcvfXKi26_MUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANpmjNNgoHdmZEmnOMzBTXZ_Px=fipg-iSk3Hv1fE7MO7+fovg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
In-Reply-To: <CANpmjNNgoHdmZEmnOMzBTXZ_Px=fipg-iSk3Hv1fE7MO7+fovg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2/1/23 13:38, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 at 20:06, Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 12:59 PM Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 9:50 PM <andrey.konovalov@linux.dev> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > From: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
>> > >
>> > > Give better names to slab-related global variables: change "depot_"
>> > > prefix to "slab_" to point out that these variables are related to
>> > > stack depot slabs.
>> >
>> > I started asking myself if the word "slab" is applicable here at all.
>> > The concept of preallocating big chunks of memory to amortize the
>> > costs belongs to the original slab allocator, but "slab" has a special
>> > meaning in Linux, and we might be confusing people by using it in a
>> > different sense.
>> > What do you think?
>>
>> Yes, I agree that using this word is a bit confusing.
>>
>> Not sure what be a good alternative though. "Region", "block",
>> "collection", and "chunk" come to mind, but they don't reflect the
>> purpose/usage of these allocations as good as "slab". Although it's
>> possible that my perception as affected by overly frequently looking
>> at the slab allocator internals :)
>>
>> Do you have a suggestion of a better word?
> 
> I'd vote for "pool" and "chunk(s)" (within that pool).

+1, also wasn't happy that "slab" is being used out of the usual context here :)

Thanks