[Devel] Re: [RFC] [PATCH] memory controller background reclamation

[YAMAMOTO Takashi]

> 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.

i don't think it's a good idea to use a single constant for
completely different things.

YAMAMOTO Takashi
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers