[lkml]   [2020]   [Oct]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
Subject[PATCH v3] mm/oom_kill: remove comment and rename is_dump_unreclaim_slabs()
Comment for is_dump_unreclaim_slabs is not really clear whether it is
meant to instruct how to use the function or whether it is an outdated
information of the past implementation of the function. it doesn't realy
help that is_dump_unreclaim_slabs is hard to grasp on its own.

Rename the helper to should_dump_unreclaim_slabs which should make it
clear what it is meant to do and drop the comment as the purpose
should be pretty evident now.

Signed-off-by: Hui Su <>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <>
mm/oom_kill.c | 8 ++------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 8b84661a6410..d181e24d7193 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -170,11 +170,7 @@ 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)
- */
-static bool is_dump_unreclaim_slabs(void)
+static bool should_dump_unreclaim_slabs(void)
unsigned long nr_lru;

@@ -463,7 +459,7 @@ static void dump_header(struct oom_control *oc, struct task_struct *p)
else {
show_mem(SHOW_MEM_FILTER_NODES, oc->nodemask);
- if (is_dump_unreclaim_slabs())
+ if (should_dump_unreclaim_slabs())
if (sysctl_oom_dump_tasks)

 \ /
  Last update: 2020-10-28 23:03    [W:0.134 / U:9.872 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site