[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EEA1DCB.7040402@parallels.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 20:18:19 +0400
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
CC: <davem@...emloft.net>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Explicitly call tcp creation and init from memcontrol.c
On 12/15/2011 08:13 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 13:34:32 +0400
> Glauber Costa<glommer@...allels.com> wrote:
>
>> Walking the proto_list holds a read_lock, which prevents us from doing
>> allocations. Splitting the tcp create function into create + init is
>> good, but it is not enough since create_files will do allocations as well
>> (dentry ones, mostly).
>>
>> Since this does not involve any protocol state, I propose we call the tcp
>> functions explicitly from memcontrol.c
>>
>> With this, we lose by now the ability of doing cgroup memcontrol for
>> protocols that are loaded as modules. But at least the ones I have in mind
>> won't really need it (tcp_ipv6 being the only one, but it uses the same data
>> structures as tcp_ipv4). So I believe this to be the simpler solution to this
>> problem.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa<glommer@...allels.com>
>> CC: Hiroyouki Kamezawa<kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
>> CC: David S. Miller<davem@...emloft.net>
>> CC: Eric Dumazet<eric.dumazet@...il.com>
>> CC: Stephen Rothwell<sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
>
> Could you remake the patch onto the 'latest' linux-next ?
> As Dave mentioned, some bandaids are already applied and this patch hunks.
Sure thing.
--
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