Re: [PATCH] Docs/admin-guide/mm/damon/lru_sort: fix grammar and stlye

[SJ Park]

On Wed, 14 Oct 2026 14:34:51 +0200 Manuel Ebner <manuelebnerli@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi SJ,
> 
> On Tue, 2026-10-13 at 17:32 -0700, SJ Park wrote:
> > Hi Manuel,
> > 
> > On Tue, 13 Oct 2026 21:13:27 +0200 Manuel Ebner <manuelebnerli@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > mention 'least-recently-used' AKA lru at the beginning
> > 
> > I think the readers would know what LRU means, and therefore
> > 'least-recently-used' is not needed.
> 
> I'm probably one of the few that doesn't know. I didn't think of the whole picture.
> You are right.

Thank you for accepting my humble suggestion.

[...]
> > > @@ -17,7 +18,7 @@ systems, LRU lists are normally not proactively sorted but partially and
> > >  As page-granularity access checking overhead could be significant on huge
> 
> Is this huge as in big or huge pages. For the latter I would put it: ``huge page``-systems
> or `huge page`-systems.

It is the former case.  "huge" as in big.

> 
> > >  systems, LRU lists are normally not proactively sorted but partially and
> > >  reactively sorted for special events including specific user requests, system
> > >  calls and memory pressure.  As a result, LRU lists are sometimes not so
> > >  perfectly prepared to be used as a trustworthy access pattern source for some
> > > -situations including reclamation target pages selection under sudden memory
> > > +situations including reclamation of target pages selection under sudden memory
> > >  pressure.
> > 
> > I cannot find what's wrong with the original sentence.  Could you expalin?
> > Also, I think the updated sentence is rather easier to misread.
> 
> It's two long sentences, thus (I think) hard to understand. I _rewrote_ it this way:
> 
> As page-granularity access checking overhead could be significant on huge systems,
> LRU lists are normally not fully nor proactively sorted but rather partially 
> and reactively sorted for special events.  These events include specific user requests,
> system calls and memory pressure.  As a result, LRU lists are sometimes not
> suitable to be used as a trustworthy access pattern source. These situations 
> including reclamation target page selection under sudden memory pressure.

I agree it is too long.  I like your suggestion, thank you.  Please ensure to
put two spaces between sentences, though.  The last sentence has only single
space after its former sentence.

[...]
> > > -DAMON_LRU_SORT finds hot pages (pages of memory regions that showing access
> > > +DAMON_LRU_SORT finds hot pages (pages of memory regions that show access
> > >  rates that higher than a user-specified threshold) and cold pages (pages of
> > 
> > rates that "are" higher?
> ... that show access rates that are higher ...
> and 
> 
> > 
> > > -memory regions that showing no access for a time that longer than a
> > > +memory regions that show no access for a time that longer than a
> 
> ... show no access for a duration that is longer than a 
> 
> Then ack.

Looks good to me.  Thank you for the nice suggestion.

[...]
> > > -Desired active to [in]active memory ratio in bp (1/10,000).
> > > +Desired active to (in)active memory ratio in bp (1/10,000).
> > 
> > I think use of brackets is also fine.  Let me know if I'm missing something.
> 
> There is 2x (de)prioritization, 6x [de]prioritizations, 2x[in]active and a few more in the
> file. They are all fine by themself, but not mixed. [] or ()?

That makes sense.  I agree consistency matters.  Let's use ().  Also please
don't forget explaining the rationale of the change on the commit message.


Thanks,
SJ

[...]