lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Sep]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: correct the comment of mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom()
    On Wed 16-09-20 09:19:27, Miaohe Lin wrote:
    > Since commit fb2a6fc56be6 ("mm: memcg: rework and document OOM waiting and
    > wakeup"), we have renamed mem_cgroup_oom_lock to mem_cgroup_oom_trylock. So
    > replace mem_cgroup_oom_lock with mem_cgroup_oom_trylock in comment.

    While you are right I find the comment more confusing then helpful.
    What does it try to tell us actually? Is it still valid? Shouldn't we
    rather remove it or make it more clear?
    >
    > Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
    > ---
    > mm/memcontrol.c | 2 +-
    > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
    >
    > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
    > index 3d26b4b954e2..702aa4d7ebbc 100644
    > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
    > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
    > @@ -1846,7 +1846,7 @@ static void mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
    >
    > /*
    > * When a new child is created while the hierarchy is under oom,
    > - * mem_cgroup_oom_lock() may not be called. Watch for underflow.
    > + * mem_cgroup_oom_trylock() may not be called. Watch for underflow.
    > */
    > spin_lock(&memcg_oom_lock);
    > for_each_mem_cgroup_tree(iter, memcg)
    > --
    > 2.19.1

    --
    Michal Hocko
    SUSE Labs

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2020-09-16 22:53    [W:3.268 / U:0.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site