lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm: memcg: keep root group unchanged if fail to create new
On Sun 11-12-11 15:39:43, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Dec 2011, Hillf Danton wrote:
>
> > If the request is not to create root group and we fail to meet it,
> > we'd leave the root unchanged.
>
> I didn't understand that at first: please say "we should" rather
> than "we'd", which I take to be an abbreviation for "we would".
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>
>
> Yes indeed, well caught:
> Acked-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
>
> I wonder what was going through the author's mind when he wrote it
> that way? I wonder if it's one of those bugs that creeps in when
> you start from a perfectly functional patch, then make refinements
> to suit feedback from reviewers.
>
> On which topic: wouldn't this patch be better just to move the
> "root_mem_cgroup = memcg;" two lines lower down (and of course
> remove free_out's "root_mem_cgroup = NULL;" as you already did)?

Yes would look nicer.

> I can't see mem_cgroup_soft_limit_tree_init() relying on
> root_mem_cgroup at all.

It doesn't but it still needs some love to handle error case properly
AFAICS. We do not deallocate softlimit trees for nodes that succeeded.

[...]

Hilf could you update the patch please?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX s.r.o.
Lihovarska 1060/12
190 00 Praha 9
Czech Republic


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-12 14:13    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans