Re: [PATCH 2/4] mm/memcg: make memory.reclaim interface generic

[Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>]

On Mon, 23 Jun 2025, Andrew Morton wrote:

>On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 11:58:49 -0700 Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> wrote:
>
>> This adds a general call for both parsing as well as the
>> common reclaim semantics. memcg is still the only user and
>> no change in semantics.
>>
>> +int user_proactive_reclaim(char *buf,
>> +			   struct mem_cgroup *memcg, pg_data_t *pgdat);
>
>Feeling nitty, is this a good name for it?  It's hard to imagine what a
>function called "user_proactive_reclaim" actually does.

I'm open to another name, sure. But imo the chosen one is actually pretty
descriptive: you know it's coming from userspace (justifying the 'buf'),
you know this is not about memory pressure and the memcg/pgdat parameters
tell the possible interfaces. Would prefixing a 'do_' be any better?

>That it isn't documented isn't helpful either!

I had done this but felt rather redundant and unnecessary, and further
don't expect for it go gain any other users. But ok, will add.

Thanks,
Davidlohr