From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] memcg: simplify mem_cgroup_reclaim_iter Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 12:54:26 -0700 Message-ID: <20130610195426.GC12461@mtj.dyndns.org> References: <20130605194552.GI15721@cmpxchg.org> <20130605200612.GH10693@mtj.dyndns.org> <20130605211704.GJ15721@cmpxchg.org> <20130605222021.GL10693@mtj.dyndns.org> <20130605222709.GM10693@mtj.dyndns.org> <20130606115031.GE7909@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20130607005242.GB16160@htj.dyndns.org> <20130607073754.GA8117@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20130607232557.GL14781@mtj.dyndns.org> <20130610080208.GB5138@dhcp22.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=M49DRMPlb10rLu46VzpFpJwLWI26L5ui/0zvVpzkZK0=; b=eZStcfEAG7zOVED2sbBPlpb6HLlnxRPSWfFLDS8pESizjvDJTIZmRPlPWIv3J8brLx lXh3n0g2aOluwMxH2Rx5aaS7bVjoN0cn5+RUQ8odpVQcEW3ZgsS2E7ZXz2rLeC8b8yIw PyB4TDvBsPzfPdc8McDhP9dtGoRvfgzGAS01bqkEBTX9ZiAnnltrLSEg3LwO0H+gmYfk zp35eh6AgRaLN+ysLq++qfy4QM5gmDBIj5QAPInm0KNaNw+Y4KmGnPlCRgvwhEfTjNxM DQwK1KGId9Pfjh0TjzH4gyN2r2J42vg6rj6bB/N+jG9cWuJqXAuJqHyQNs/etrHGkdTG k0Kw== Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130610080208.GB5138@dhcp22.suse.cz> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Michal Hocko Cc: Johannes Weiner , bsingharora@gmail.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, lizefan@huawei.com Hello, Michal. On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:02:08AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > Sure a next visit on the same root subtree (same node, zone and prio) > would css_put it but what if that root goes away itself. Still fixable, > if every group checks its own cached iters and css_put everybody but > that is even uglier. So doing the up-the-hierarchy cleanup in RCU > callback is much easier. Ooh, right, we don't need cleanup of the cached cursors on destruction if we get this correct - especially if we make cursors point to the next cgroup to visit as self is always the first one to visit. Yeah, if we can do away with that, doing that way is definitely better. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org