[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47F1E3C1.6050802@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 12:56:57 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
CC: Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
Sudhir Kumar <skumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@...inux.co.jp>, lizf@...fujitsu.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, taka@...inux.co.jp,
linux-mm@...ck.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][-mm] Add an owner to the mm_struct (v3)
Paul Menage wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11:23 PM, Balbir Singh
> <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> > Here we'll want to call vm_cgroup_update_mm_owner(), to adjust the
>> > accounting. (Or if in future we end up with more than a couple of
>> > subsystems that want notification at this time, we'll want to call
>> > cgroup_update_mm_owner() and have it call any interested subsystems.
>> >
>>
>> I don't think we need to adjust accounting, since only mm->owner is changing and
>> not the cgroup to which the task/mm belongs. Do we really need to notify? I
>> don't want to do any notifications under task_lock().
>
> It's possible but unlikely that the new owner is in a different cgroup.
Hmmm... that can never happen with thread groups, since mm->owner is
p->group_leader and that never exits unless all threads are gone (it can
explicitly change groups though). Without thread groups, the new owner can
belong to a different cgroup, so we might need notification.
--
Warm Regards,
Balbir Singh
Linux Technology Center
IBM, ISTL
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists