[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1206252224350.30072@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, devel@...nvz.org,
kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] memcg: propagate kmem limiting information to
children
On Mon, 25 Jun 2012, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > @@ -287,7 +287,11 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
> > * Should the accounting and control be hierarchical, per subtree?
> > */
> > bool use_hierarchy;
> > - bool kmem_accounted;
> > + /*
> > + * bit0: accounted by this cgroup
> > + * bit1: accounted by a parent.
> > + */
> > + volatile unsigned long kmem_accounted;
>
> I suggest
>
> unsigned long kmem_accounted; /* See KMEM_ACCOUNTED_*, below */
>
> > bool oom_lock;
> > atomic_t under_oom;
> > @@ -340,6 +344,9 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
> > #endif
> > };
> >
> > +#define KMEM_ACCOUNTED_THIS 0
> > +#define KMEM_ACCOUNTED_PARENT 1
>
> And then document the fields here.
>
In hex, please?
--
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