linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] memcg: dirty pages accounting and limiting infrastructure

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1002221319170.14426@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date:	Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:21:53 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Andrea Righi <arighi@...eler.com>
cc:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] memcg: dirty pages accounting and limiting
 infrastructure

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, Andrea Righi wrote:

> > Hmm...do we need spinlock ? You use "unsigned long", then, read-write
> > is always atomic if not read-modify-write.
> 
> I think I simply copy&paste the memcg->swappiness case. But I agree,
> read-write should be atomic.
> 

We don't need memcg->reclaim_param_lock in get_swappiness() or
mem_cgroup_get_reclaim_priority().
--
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/