On Mon, Jul 04, 2022 at 02:59:50PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> writes: > > > On Mon, Jul 04, 2022 at 02:04:41PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > > [...] > > >> Please rephrase the documentation of @zero-copy-copied in terms of > >> @dirty-sync-count. Here's my attempt. > >> > >> # @zero-copy-copied: Number of times dirty RAM synchronization could not > >> # avoid copying zero pages. This is between 0 and > >> # @dirty-sync-count. (since 7.1) > > > > Any one have preferences on the name - i get slight put off by the > > repeated word in the property name here. > > > > @zero-copy-rejects ? > > @zero-copy-misses ? > > @zero-copy-fails ? > > I'd consider any of these an improvement. Not a native speaker, but > perhaps "failures" instead of "fails". > > We could also express the connection to @dirty-sync-count right in the > name, like @dirty-sync-rejected-zero-copy, @dirty-sync-missed-zero-copy, > @dirty-sync-failed-zero-copy. Or maybe -copies.
Yeah, @dirty-sync-missed-zero-copy is probably my favourite. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
