[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FE9D568.4050802@parallels.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 19:29:44 +0400
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] memcg: kmem controller infrastructure
On 06/26/2012 03:17 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> + if (ret == -EINTR) {
>> >+ nofail = true;
>> >+ /*
>> >+ * __mem_cgroup_try_charge() chose to bypass to root due
>> >+ * to OOM kill or fatal signal.
> Is "bypass" correct? Maybe "fall back"?
>
Heh, forgot this one, sorry =(
__mem_cgroup_try_charge does "goto bypass", so I believe the term
"bypass" is better to allow whoever is following this code to follow it.
--
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