Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 18 Sep 2011 00:32:27 -0300 | From | Glauber Costa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] socket: initial cgroup code. |
| |
On 09/17/2011 02:52 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:46:10PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote: >> We aim to control the amount of kernel memory pinned at any >> time by tcp sockets. To lay the foundations for this work, >> this patch adds a pointer to the kmem_cgroup to the socket >> structure. >> >> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa<glommer@parallels.com> >> CC: David S. Miller<davem@davemloft.net> >> CC: Hiroyouki Kamezawa<kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> >> CC: Eric W. Biederman<ebiederm@xmission.com> >> --- >> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> include/net/sock.h | 2 ++ >> net/core/sock.c | 3 +++ >> 3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h >> index 3b535db..be457ce 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h >> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h >> @@ -395,5 +395,43 @@ mem_cgroup_print_bad_page(struct page *page) >> } >> #endif >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_INET >> +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_KMEM >> +#include<net/sock.h> >> +static inline void sock_update_memcg(struct sock *sk) >> +{ >> + /* right now a socket spends its whole life in the same cgroup */ >> + BUG_ON(sk->sk_cgrp); >> + >> + rcu_read_lock(); >> + sk->sk_cgrp = mem_cgroup_from_task(current); >> + >> + /* >> + * We don't need to protect against anything task-related, because >> + * we are basically stuck with the sock pointer that won't change, >> + * even if the task that originated the socket changes cgroups. >> + * >> + * What we do have to guarantee, is that the chain leading us to >> + * the top level won't change under our noses. Incrementing the >> + * reference count via cgroup_exclude_rmdir guarantees that. >> + */ >> + cgroup_exclude_rmdir(mem_cgroup_css(sk->sk_cgrp)); >> + rcu_read_unlock(); >> +} >> + >> +static inline void sock_release_memcg(struct sock *sk) >> +{ >> + cgroup_release_and_wakeup_rmdir(mem_cgroup_css(sk->sk_cgrp)); >> +} > > Do we really need to have these functions in the header? > No, I can move it to memcontrol.c
| |