Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:10:27 +0400 | From | Glauber Costa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 06/14] memcg: kmem controller infrastructure |
| |
On 10/19/2012 02:06 AM, David Rientjes wrote: > On Thu, 18 Oct 2012, Glauber Costa wrote: > >>> Do we actually need to test PF_KTHREAD when current->mm == NULL? >>> Perhaps because of aio threads whcih temporarily adopt a userspace mm? >> >> I believe so. I remember I discussed this in the past with David >> Rientjes and he advised me to test for both. >> > > PF_KTHREAD can do use_mm() to assume an ->mm but hopefully they aren't > allocating slab while doing so. Have you considered actually charging > current->mm->owner for that memory, though, since the kthread will have > freed the memory before unuse_mm() or otherwise have charged it on behalf > of a user process, i.e. only exempting PF_KTHREAD? > I always charge current->mm->owner.
| |