[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160127143045.GA9623@esperanza>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:30:45 +0300
From: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...tuozzo.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm: memcontrol: generalize locking for the
page->mem_cgroup binding
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 04:00:02PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> @@ -683,17 +683,17 @@ int __set_page_dirty_buffers(struct page *page)
> } while (bh != head);
> }
> /*
> - * Use mem_group_begin_page_stat() to keep PageDirty synchronized with
> - * per-memcg dirty page counters.
> + * Lock out page->mem_cgroup migration to keep PageDirty
> + * synchronized with per-memcg dirty page counters.
> */
> - memcg = mem_cgroup_begin_page_stat(page);
> + memcg = lock_page_memcg(page);
> newly_dirty = !TestSetPageDirty(page);
> spin_unlock(&mapping->private_lock);
>
> if (newly_dirty)
> __set_page_dirty(page, mapping, memcg, 1);
Do we really want to pass memcg to __set_page_dirty and then to
account_page_dirtied, increasing stack/regs usage even in case memory
cgroup is disabled? May be, it'd be better to make
mem_cgroup_update_page_stat take a page instead of a memcg?
Thanks,
Vladimir
>
> - mem_cgroup_end_page_stat(memcg);
> + unlock_page_memcg(memcg);
>
> if (newly_dirty)
> __mark_inode_dirty(mapping->host, I_DIRTY_PAGES);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists