[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <qtudjvrdvbsz6rrygb5bt32dzps6ocwefhr5hyfgtam65jowdo@colgnna6ogqm>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2025 12:20:28 -0700
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
JP Kobryn <inwardvessel@...il.com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>, Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@...cle.com>,
Yosry Ahmed <yosry.ahmed@...ux.dev>, bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Meta kernel team <kernel-team@...a.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] cgroup: nmi safe css_rstat_updated
On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 08:15:17AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 03:15:28PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > Shakeel Butt (4):
> > cgroup: support to enable nmi-safe css_rstat_updated
> > cgroup: make css_rstat_updated nmi safe
> > cgroup: remove per-cpu per-subsystem locks
> > memcg: cgroup: call css_rstat_updated irrespective of in_nmi()
>
> The patches look good to me. How should it be routed? Should I take all
> four, just the first three or would it better to route all through -mm?
>
I would like all four to be together and since most of the code is in
cgroup, cgroup tree makes more sense unless Andrew has different
opinion.
thanks,
Shakeel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists