[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALvZod5p-O72gCY-R+oLcDZjEkPRioz7e7p5Jg=nXxhmtiwKWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 16:59:56 -0700
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
To: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Cc: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@...e.com>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
LTP List <ltp@...ts.linux.it>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mm: memcg/slab: Stop reparented obj_cgroups from
charging root
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 10:25 AM Roman Gushchin <guro@...com> wrote:
>
[snip]
> >
> > Since bf4f059954dc ("mm: memcg/slab: obj_cgroup API") is in 5.9, I
> > think we can take this patch for 5.9 and 5.10 but keep Roman's cleanup
> > for 5.11.
> >
> > What does everyone think?
>
> I think we should use the link to the root approach both for stable backports
> and for 5.11+, to keep them in sync. The cleanup (always charging the root cgroup)
> is not directly related to this problem, and we can keep it for 5.11+ only.
>
> Thanks!
Roman, can you send the signed-off patch for the root linking for
use_hierarchy=0?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists