From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Glauber Costa Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/13] memcg: kmem accounting lifecycle management Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 16:43:05 +0400 Message-ID: <50698FD9.2040808@parallels.com> References: <1347977050-29476-1-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <1347977050-29476-10-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <20121001121553.GG8622@dhcp22.suse.cz> <50698C97.70703@parallels.com> <20121001123654.GJ8622@dhcp22.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20121001123654.GJ8622-2MMpYkNvuYDjFM9bn6wA6Q@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, kamezawa.hiroyu-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org, devel-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, Tejun Heo , linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, Suleiman Souhlal , Frederic Weisbecker , Mel Gorman , David Rientjes , Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , Johannes Weiner On 10/01/2012 04:36 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 01-10-12 16:29:11, Glauber Costa wrote: >> On 10/01/2012 04:15 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: >>> Based on the previous discussions I guess this one will get reworked, >>> right? >>> >> >> Yes, but most of it stayed. The hierarchy part is gone, but because we >> will still have kmem pages floating around (potentially), I am still >> using the mark_dead() trick with the corresponding get when kmem_accounted. > > Is it OK if I hold on with the review of this one until the next > version? > Of course. I haven't sent it yet because I also received a lot more feedback for the slab part (which is expected), and I want to get a least part of that going before I send it again.