[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FDF1AAE.4080209@parallels.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:10:22 +0400
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
To: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
CC: <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Cristoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
<cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, <devel@...nvz.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/25] memcg: Always free struct memcg through schedule_work()
On 06/18/2012 04:07 PM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
> (2012/06/18 19:27), Glauber Costa wrote:
>> Right now we free struct memcg with kfree right after a
>> rcu grace period, but defer it if we need to use vfree() to get
>> rid of that memory area. We do that by need, because we need vfree
>> to be called in a process context.
>>
>> This patch unifies this behavior, by ensuring that even kfree will
>> happen in a separate thread. The goal is to have a stable place to
>> call the upcoming jump label destruction function outside the realm
>> of the complicated and quite far-reaching cgroup lock (that can't be
>> held when calling neither the cpu_hotplug.lock nor the jump_label_mutex)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa<glommer@...allels.com>
>> CC: Tejun Heo<tj@...nel.org>
>> CC: Li Zefan<lizefan@...wei.com>
>> CC: Kamezawa Hiroyuki<kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
>> CC: Johannes Weiner<hannes@...xchg.org>
>> CC: Michal Hocko<mhocko@...e.cz>
>
> How about cut out this patch and merge first as simple cleanu up and
> to reduce patch stack on your side ?
>
> Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
I believe this is already in the -mm tree (from the sock memcg fixes)
But actually, my main trouble with this series here, is that I am basing
it on Pekka's tree, while some of the fixes are in -mm already.
If I'd base it on -mm I would lose some of the stuff as well.
Maybe Pekka can merge the current -mm with his tree?
So far I am happy with getting comments from people about the code, so I
did not get overly concerned about that.
--
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