[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YpgpOxzxNzbN26mr@FVFYT0MHHV2J.googleapis.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2022 11:06:35 +0800
From: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
To: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
Cc: hannes@...xchg.org, mhocko@...nel.org, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
shakeelb@...gle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, duanxiongchun@...edance.com,
longman@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 03/11] mm: memcontrol: prepare objcg API for non-kmem
usage
On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 07:34:34PM +0200, Michal Koutný wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 03:49:11PM +0800, Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com> wrote:
> > So we also allocate an object cgroup for the root_mem_cgroup.
>
> This change made me wary that this patch also kmem charging in the
> root_mem_cgroup. Fortunately, get_obj_cgroup_from_current won't return
Sorry for the confusing. Right, we don't charge kmem to the root objcg.
> this objcg so all is fine.
>
> > +}
> > +#else
> > +static inline void obj_cgroup_release_bytes(struct obj_cgroup *objcg)
> > +{
> > +}
> > +#endif
>
> This empty body is for !CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM, however, the subsequent use for LRU
> pages makes no use of these, so it's warranted.
>
> Altogether, I find this correct, hence
> Reviewed-by: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
>
Thanks Michal.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists