Re: [PATCH] mm/memcg: fix obsolete function name in mem_cgroup_protection()

[Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>]

On 2023/7/24 4:37, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 11:25:38AM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> @@ -582,9 +582,9 @@ static inline void mem_cgroup_protection(struct mem_cgroup *root,
>>  	/*
>>  	 * There is no reclaim protection applied to a targeted reclaim.
>>  	 * We are special casing this specific case here because
>> -	 * mem_cgroup_protected calculation is not robust enough to keep
>> -	 * the protection invariant for calculated effective values for
>> -	 * parallel reclaimers with different reclaim target. This is
>> +	 * mem_cgroup_calculate_protection calculation is not robust enough
>> +	 * to keep the protection invariant for calculated effective values
>> +	 * for parallel reclaimers with different reclaim target. This is
>>  	 * especially a problem for tail memcgs (as they have pages on LRU)
>>  	 * which would want to have effective values 0 for targeted reclaim
>>  	 * but a different value for external reclaim.
> 
> This reads a little awkwardly now.  How about:
> 
>  	 * We are special casing this specific case here because
> -	 * mem_cgroup_protected calculation is not robust enough to keep
> +	 * mem_cgroup_calculate_protection is not robust enough to keep

Sounds better. Will do it in v2.

Thanks.