[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YPRdH56+dOFs/Ypu@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2021 17:55:59 +0100
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc: tj@...nel.org, hannes@...xchg.org, mhocko@...nel.org,
vdavydov.dev@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
shakeelb@...gle.com, guro@...com, songmuchun@...edance.com,
shy828301@...il.com, alexs@...nel.org, richard.weiyang@...il.com,
vbabka@...e.cz, axboe@...nel.dk, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com,
david@...hat.com, apopple@...dia.com, minchan@...nel.org,
linmiaohe@...wei.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] mm, memcg: inline mem_cgroup_{charge/uncharge} to
improve disabled memcg config
On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 05:36:25PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> @@ -6723,7 +6722,7 @@ static int __mem_cgroup_charge(struct page *page, struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> }
>
> /**
> - * mem_cgroup_charge - charge a newly allocated page to a cgroup
> + * __mem_cgroup_charge - charge a newly allocated page to a cgroup
> * @page: page to charge
> * @mm: mm context of the victim
> * @gfp_mask: reclaim mode
This patch conflicts with the folio work, so I'm just rebasing the
folio patches on top of this, and I think this part of the patch is a
mistake. We don't want to document the __mem_cgroup_charge() function.
That's an implementation detail. This patch should instead have moved the
kernel-doc to memcontrol.h and continued to document mem_cgroup_charge().
Powered by blists - more mailing lists