[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZxvYRpil9K-aVAe6@google.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 17:41:26 +0000
From: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
Meta kernel team <kernel-team@...a.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 5/6] memcg-v1: no need for memcg locking for MGLRU
On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 06:23:02PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> While updating the generation of the folios, MGLRU requires that the
> folio's memcg association remains stable. With the charge migration
> deprecated, there is no need for MGLRU to acquire locks to keep the
> folio and memcg association stable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>
Reviewed-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists