[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190313182301.GA7336@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 18:23:09 +0000
From: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
CC: Roman Gushchin <guroan@...il.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] mm: flush memcg percpu stats and events before
releasing
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 12:00:17PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 03:34:02PM -0700, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > Flush percpu stats and events data to corresponding before releasing
> > percpu memory.
> >
> > Although per-cpu stats are never exactly precise, dropping them on
> > floor regularly may lead to an accumulation of an error. So, it's
> > safer to flush them before releasing.
> >
> > To minimize the number of atomic updates, let's sum all stats/events
> > on all cpus locally, and then make a single update per entry.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
>
> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
>
> Do you mind merging 6/6 into this one? That would make it easier to
> verify that the code added in this patch and the code removed in 6/6
> are indeed functionally equivalent.
>
I did try, but the result is the mess of added and removed lines,
which are *almost* the same, but are slightly different (e.g. tabs).
So it's much easier to review it as two separate patches.
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists