[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FDF1E89.2020007@parallels.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:26:49 +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>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 19/25] memcg: disable kmem code when not in use.
>>
>> static void drain_all_stock_async(struct mem_cgroup *memcg);
>> @@ -4344,8 +4358,13 @@ static int mem_cgroup_write(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft,
>> *
>> * But it is not worth the trouble
>> */
>> - if (!memcg->kmem_accounted&& val != RESOURCE_MAX)
>> + mutex_lock(&set_limit_mutex);
>> + if (!memcg->kmem_accounted&& val != RESOURCE_MAX
>> + && !memcg->kmem_accounted) {
>
> I'm sorry why you check the value twice ?
>
Hi Kame,
For no reason, it should be removed. I never noticed this because 1)
This is the kind of thing testing will never reveal, and 2), this
actually goes away in a later patch (memcg: propagate kmem limiting
information to children)
In any case, I will update my tree here.
Thanks for spotting this
--
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