[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20111122110707.377ff8ef.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 11:07:07 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <jbottomley@...allels.com>,
<eric.dumazet@...il.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <paul@...lmenage.org>,
<lizf@...fujitsu.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <devel@...nvz.org>,
<kirill@...temov.name>, <gthelen@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [Devel] Re: [PATCH v5 00/10] per-cgroup tcp memory pressure
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 17:39:03 -0200
Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com> wrote:
> On 11/17/2011 07:35 PM, David Miller wrote:
> > TCP specific stuff in mm/memcontrol.c, at best that's not nice at all.
>
> How crucial is that? Thing is that as far as I am concerned, all the
> memcg people really want the inner layout of struct mem_cgroup to be
> private to memcontrol.c
This is just because memcg is just related to memory management and I don't
want it be wide spreaded, 'struct mem_cgroup' has been changed often.
But I don't like to have TCP code in memcgroup.c.
New idea is welcome.
> This means that at some point, we need to have
> at least a wrapper in memcontrol.c that is able to calculate the offset
> of the tcp structure, and since most functions are actually quite
> simple, that would just make us do more function calls.
>
> Well, an alternative to that would be to use a void pointer in the newly
> added struct cg_proto to an already parsed memcg-related field
> (in this case tcp_memcontrol), that would be passed to the functions
> instead of the whole memcg structure. Do you think this would be
> preferable ?
>
like this ?
struct mem_cgroup_sub_controls {
struct mem_cgroup *mem;
union {
struct tcp_mem_control tcp;
} data;
};
/* for loosely coupled controls for memcg */
struct memcg_sub_controls_function
{
struct memcg_sub_controls (*create)(struct mem_cgroup *);
struct memcg_sub_controls (*destroy)(struct mem_cgroup *);
}
int register_memcg_sub_controls(char *name,
struct memcg_sub_controls_function *abis);
struct mem_cgroup {
.....
.....
/* Root memcg will have no sub_controls! */
struct memcg_sub_controls *sub_controls[NR_MEMCG_SUB_CONTROLS];
}
Maybe some functions should be exported.
Thanks,
-Kame
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists