Skip to contentSkip to conversation

mm,oom_kill: fix the comment of is_dump_unreclaim_slabs()

PATCH In review Hui Su 2 participants 3 messages Sep 26, 2020 – Oct 27, 2020

Subsystems (2)
lore
Share & tools
lore

Hui Su

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 mm,oom_kill: fix the comment of is_dump_unreclaim_slabs()

fix the comment of is_dump_unreclaim_slabs(), it just check whether nr_unreclaimable slabs amount is greater than user memory.

---
 mm/oom_kill.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
mm/oom_kill.c +3 -3
index e90f25d6385d..a4a47559abcd 100644
@@ -168,9 +168,9 @@ static bool oom_unkillable_task(struct task_struct *p)
 	return false;
 }
 
-/*
- * Print out unreclaimble slabs info when unreclaimable slabs amount is greater
- * than all user memory (LRU pages)
+/**
+ * Check whether unreclaimable slabs amount is greater than
+ * all user memory(LRU pages).
  */
 static bool is_dump_unreclaim_slabs(void)
 {
Signature · 1 line
2.25.1
maintainer
#1 lore raw
Quoted 3 lines · Hui Su

fix the comment of is_dump_unreclaim_slabs(), it just check whether nr_unreclaimable slabs amount is greater than user memory.

The original comment is meant to say when the function should be used. Your update makes the comment makes it a kerneldoc for an internal function which on its own is not very useful. It is quite clear what the function does. The intention is not clear anymore though.

If you find the comment confusing, however, then I would just propose either dropping it altogether or rename it to should_dump_unreclaimable_slab. Which is quite mouthful TBH.

Quoted 26 lines
---
 mm/oom_kill.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
mm/oom_kill.c +3 -3
index e90f25d6385d..a4a47559abcd 100644
@@ -168,9 +168,9 @@ static bool oom_unkillable_task(struct task_struct *p)
 	return false;
 }
 
-/*
- * Print out unreclaimble slabs info when unreclaimable slabs amount is greater
- * than all user memory (LRU pages)
+/**
+ * Check whether unreclaimable slabs amount is greater than
+ * all user memory(LRU pages).
  */
 static bool is_dump_unreclaim_slabs(void)
 {
Signature · 1 line
2.25.1
Signature · 2 lines
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
author
#2 lore raw
Quoted 5 lines · Michal Hocko
Quoted 3 lines · Hui Su

fix the comment of is_dump_unreclaim_slabs(), it just check whether nr_unreclaimable slabs amount is greater than user memory.

Quoted 9 lines

The original comment is meant to say when the function should be used. Your update makes the comment makes it a kerneldoc for an internal function which on its own is not very useful. It is quite clear what the function does. The intention is not clear anymore though.

If you find the comment confusing, however, then I would just propose either dropping it altogether or rename it to should_dump_unreclaimable_slab. Which is quite mouthful TBH.

Hi, Michal:

Thanks for your explanation.

I also think maybe we should delete the comment, and change the rename it to should_dump_unreclaimable_slabs().

Andrew,
Is that ok?