Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755922AbYKDGQE (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2008 01:16:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753591AbYKDGPv (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2008 01:15:51 -0500 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.33.17]:33434 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752938AbYKDGPu (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2008 01:15:50 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to: cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=b09A8wXRXPe8k/ZsH1vgjKVec60yXt2aO/orVTRVZH1ZpAvhUSM8LEdG7RCQ5FCao uWhIzHuojHmpfEz1qotgw== MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20081031115241.1399d605.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20081031115057.6da3dafd.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20081031115241.1399d605.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 22:15:41 -0800 Message-ID: <6599ad830811032215j3ce5dcc1g6d0c3e9439a004d@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/5] memcg : force_empty to do move account From: Paul Menage To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" , hugh@veritas.com, taka@valinux.co.jp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1040 Lines: 26 On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 6:52 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > This patch provides a function to move account information of a page between > mem_cgroups and rewrite force_empty to make use of this. One part of this that wasn't clear to me - if a cgroup has a lot of unmapped pagecache sitting around but no tasks, and we try to rmdir it, then all the pagecache gets moved to the parent too? Or just the stray mapped pages? > @@ -597,7 +709,7 @@ static int mem_cgroup_charge_common(stru > prefetchw(pc); > > mem = memcg; > - ret = mem_cgroup_try_charge(mm, gfp_mask, &mem); > + ret = __mem_cgroup_try_charge(mm, gfp_mask, &mem, true); Isn't this the same as the definition of mem_cgroup_try_charge()? So you could leave it as-is? Paul -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/