[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ggavn7jgnti6uhdwlbgmuz4miplyh5zzixgmlye53qmaoh7tkp@3srwgtxrhtld>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2025 15:17:09 -0700
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mhocko@...nel.org, hannes@...xchg.org,
roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, yosryahmed@...gle.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] mm/memcg: make memory.reclaim interface generic
On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 11:58:49AM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> +
> +int user_proactive_reclaim(char *buf, struct mem_cgroup *memcg, pg_data_t *pgdat)
> +{
> + unsigned int nr_retries = MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES;
> + unsigned long nr_to_reclaim, nr_reclaimed = 0;
> + int swappiness = -1;
> + char *old_buf, *start;
> + substring_t args[MAX_OPT_ARGS];
> +
> + if (!buf || (!memcg && !pgdat))
I don't think this series is adding a use-case where both memcg and
pgdat are non-NULL, so let's error out on that as well.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists