| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20111227182613.GA21840@shutemov.name>
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 20:26:13 +0200
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Makefiles: Disable unused-variable warning (was: Re:
[PATCH 1/6] memcg: fix unused variable warning)
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 02:57:52PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sat 24-12-11 05:00:14, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
> >
> > mm/memcontrol.c: In function ‘memcg_check_events’:
> > mm/memcontrol.c:784:22: warning: unused variable ‘do_numainfo’ [-Wunused-variable]
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@...temov.name>
> > ---
> > mm/memcontrol.c | 7 ++++---
> > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > index d643bd6..a5e92bd 100644
> > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > @@ -781,14 +781,15 @@ static void memcg_check_events(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct page *page)
> > /* threshold event is triggered in finer grain than soft limit */
> > if (unlikely(mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(memcg,
> > MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_THRESH))) {
> > - bool do_softlimit, do_numainfo;
> > + bool do_softlimit;
> >
> > - do_softlimit = mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(memcg,
> > - MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_SOFTLIMIT);
> > #if MAX_NUMNODES > 1
> > + bool do_numainfo;
> > do_numainfo = mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(memcg,
> > MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_NUMAINFO);
> > #endif
> > + do_softlimit = mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(memcg,
> > + MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_SOFTLIMIT);
>
> I don't like this very much. Maybe we should get rid of both do_* and
> do it with flags? But maybe it is not worth the additional code at
> all...
Something like this (untested):
====
>From f57e1a2e1aaaa167c75b963d5bf12fcbdd3331b8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 20:17:13 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] memcg: cleanup memcg_check_events()
Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@...temov.name>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index d643bd6..40c2236 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -108,11 +108,12 @@ enum mem_cgroup_events_index {
* than using jiffies etc. to handle periodic memcg event.
*/
enum mem_cgroup_events_target {
- MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_THRESH,
- MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_SOFTLIMIT,
- MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_NUMAINFO,
- MEM_CGROUP_NTARGETS,
+ MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_THRESH = BIT(1),
+ MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_SOFTLIMIT = BIT(2),
+ MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_NUMAINFO = BIT(3),
};
+#define MEM_CGROUP_NTARGETS 3
+
#define THRESHOLDS_EVENTS_TARGET (128)
#define SOFTLIMIT_EVENTS_TARGET (1024)
#define NUMAINFO_EVENTS_TARGET (1024)
@@ -743,7 +744,7 @@ static unsigned long mem_cgroup_nr_lru_pages(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
return total;
}
-static bool mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
+static int mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
enum mem_cgroup_events_target target)
{
unsigned long val, next;
@@ -766,9 +767,9 @@ static bool mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
break;
}
__this_cpu_write(memcg->stat->targets[target], next);
- return true;
+ return target;
}
- return false;
+ return 0;
}
/*
@@ -777,29 +778,34 @@ static bool mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
*/
static void memcg_check_events(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct page *page)
{
+ int flags;
+
preempt_disable();
- /* threshold event is triggered in finer grain than soft limit */
- if (unlikely(mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(memcg,
- MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_THRESH))) {
- bool do_softlimit, do_numainfo;
+ flags = mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(memcg, MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_THRESH);
- do_softlimit = mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(memcg,
+ /*
+ * Threshold event is triggered in finer grain than soft limit
+ * and numainfo
+ */
+ if (unlikely(flags)) {
+ flags |= mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(memcg,
MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_SOFTLIMIT);
#if MAX_NUMNODES > 1
- do_numainfo = mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(memcg,
+ flags |= mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(memcg,
MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_NUMAINFO);
#endif
- preempt_enable();
+ }
+ preempt_enable();
+ if (unlikely(flags)) {
mem_cgroup_threshold(memcg);
- if (unlikely(do_softlimit))
+ if (unlikely(flags & MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_SOFTLIMIT))
mem_cgroup_update_tree(memcg, page);
#if MAX_NUMNODES > 1
- if (unlikely(do_numainfo))
+ if (unlikely(flags & MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_NUMAINFO))
atomic_inc(&memcg->numainfo_events);
#endif
- } else
- preempt_enable();
+ }
}
struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroup_from_cont(struct cgroup *cont)
--
1.7.7.3
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
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