Re: [PATCH 2/2] Explicitly call tcp creation and init from memcontrol.c

[Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>]

On 12/16/2011 02:20 AM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 01:13:16 +0900
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki<kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>  wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 13:34:32 +0400
>> Glauber Costa<glommer@parallels.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> Walking the proto_list holds a read_lock, which prevents us from doing
>>> allocations. Splitting the tcp create function into create + init is
>>> good, but it is not enough since create_files will do allocations as well
>>> (dentry ones, mostly).
>>>
>>> Since this does not involve any protocol state, I propose we call the tcp
>>> functions explicitly from memcontrol.c
>>>
>>> With this, we lose by now the ability of doing cgroup memcontrol for
>>> protocols that are loaded as modules. But at least the ones I have in mind
>>> won't really need it (tcp_ipv6 being the only one, but it uses the same data
>>> structures as tcp_ipv4). So I believe this to be the simpler solution to this
>>> problem.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa<glommer@parallels.com>
>>> CC: Hiroyouki Kamezawa<kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
>>> CC: David S. Miller<davem@davemloft.net>
>>> CC: Eric Dumazet<eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
>>> CC: Stephen Rothwell<sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>>
>> Could you remake the patch onto the 'latest' linux-next ?
>> As Dave mentioned, some bandaids are already applied and this patch hunks.
>
> Applied patches by hand and did small test for hours.
> seems good.
>
> Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki<kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
>
Kame,

Thanks. But see Dave's answer to this: He'd like me to follow a slightly 
different approach (I've attached a patch earlier)