Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 17 May 2019 11:00:44 +0300
From:   Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
To:     Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Cc:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
        Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: make it work on sparse non-0-node systems
Message-ID: <20190517080044.tnwhbeyxcccsymgf@esperanza>
References: <359d98e6-044a-7686-8522-bdd2489e9456@suse.cz>
 <20190429105939.11962-1-jslaby@suse.cz>
 <20190509122526.ck25wscwanooxa3t@esperanza>
 <20190516135923.GV16651@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <68075828-8fd7-adbb-c1d9-5eb39fbf18cb@suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <68075828-8fd7-adbb-c1d9-5eb39fbf18cb@suse.cz>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 06:48:37AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 16. 05. 19, 15:59, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >> However, I tend to agree with Michal that (ab)using node[0].memcg_lrus
> >> to check if a list_lru is memcg aware looks confusing. I guess we could
> >> simply add a bool flag to list_lru instead. Something like this, may be:
> > 
> > Yes, this makes much more sense to me!
> 
> I am not sure if I should send a patch with this solution or Vladimir
> will (given he is an author and has a diff already)?

I didn't even try to compile it, let alone test it. I'd appreciate if
you could wrap it up and send it out using your authorship. Feel free
to add my acked-by.