Re: [PATCH 3/6] mm: hugetlb_vmemmap: introduce the name HVO

[Muchun Song]

On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 03:27:40PM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> On 06/16/22 11:28, Muchun Song wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 03:51:51PM +0100, Joao Martins wrote:
> > > On 6/13/22 07:35, Muchun Song wrote:
> > > > It it inconvenient to mention the feature of optimizing vmemmap pages associated
> > > > with HugeTLB pages when communicating with others since there is no specific or
> > > > abbreviated name for it when it is first introduced.  Let us give it a name HVO
> > > > (HugeTLB Vmemmap Optimization) from now.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Just thought I would throw this suggestion, even though I am probably too late.
> > > 
> > 
> > Not too late, we are still discussing the name.
> > 
> > > I find the term "vmemmap deduplication" more self-explanatory (at least for me)
> > > to refer to your technique ,and similarly s/optimize/dedup. Or vmemmap tail page
> > > deduplication (too verbose maybe) because really that's what this optimization is all
> > > about. OTOH it would slightly deviate from what maybe established now
> > > in hugetlb code.
> > >
> > 
> > Well, I have looked up this word "deduplication" which refers to a method of
> > eliminating a dataset’s redundant data.  At least I agree with you "deduplication"
> > is more expressive for my technique.  So I am thinking of renaming "HVO" to "HVD (
> > HugeTLB Vmemmap Deduplication)".  In this series (patch 6), I have renamed
> > hugetlb_vmemmap_alloc/free to hugetlb_vmemmmap_optimize/restore.  I am also
> > thinking of replacing it to:
> > 
> >   hugetlb_vmemmmap_deduplicate vs hugetlb_vmemmmap_duplicate.
> > 
> > Many other places in hugetlb_vmemmap.c use "optimize" word, maybe most of them do
> > not need to be changed since "deduplication" is also a __optimization__ technique.
> > 
> > Hi Mike and David:
> > 
> > What your opinion on this? I want to hear some thoughts from you.
> 
> I can understand Joao's preference for deduplication.  However, I can
> also understand just using the term optimization.  IMO, neither is far
> superior to the other.  It is mostly a matter of personal preference.
> 
> My preference would be to leave it as named in this series unless
> someone has a strong preference for changing.
>

All right. I'll keep the HVO name.

Thanks.