From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memcg: use exist interface to get css from memcg Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 05:55:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <1342609734-22437-1-git-send-email-liwanp@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120719092928.GA2864@tiehlicka.suse.cz> <5007E00B.6000802@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:x-x-sender:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=uZpRDpnAedcgbDz43BpvWP+vYlXNK0yduBiu1wMe4GE=; b=GjDomB4z0xnvT34TQhIJvQeUllk3c5xJNdaquO4TAmeH9JjK0p/yGTMFIn+3/naw7r vVyyrLTkG3D92EyXj8dEVDy43wj62aAGrzLV+4abC06a2eTQqEyCvVSeieyL9tB5jWAy fkg/iGEjvQktctAtkxV+wcw3kc+odFiHaNfKDtpiLYouY7P+Bfexrj4fFEht2mTUTyWj JOGZ6fzdIqNAqh5cCluFNWOAOgDQtYXBTI39njO/Hc7vOyNEfY/TbxbySPNqdNKe8Uur sW/Yjok5+MQUm3F7NGWgK1Sal0s+OD/KC3aezRoiq1M4CDxmL+NT0MbrKwD+JJpajIKv RvZw== In-Reply-To: <5007E00B.6000802-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Kamezawa Hiroyuki Cc: Michal Hocko , Wanpeng Li , linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, Johannes Weiner , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Gavin Shan , Bob Liu On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote: > (2012/07/19 18:29), Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 18-07-12 19:08:54, Wanpeng Li wrote: > > > use exist interface mem_cgroup_css instead of &mem->css. > > > > This interface has been added to enable mem->css outside of > > mm/memcontrol.c (where we define struct mem_cgroup). There is one user > > left (hwpoison_filter_task) after recent clean ups. > > > > I think we shouldn't spread the usage inside the mm/memcontrol.c. The > > compiler inlines the function for all callers added by this patch but I > > wouldn't rely on it. It is also unfortunate that we cannot convert all > > dereferences (e.g. const mem_cgroup). > > Moreover it doesn't add any additional type safety. So I would vote for > > not taking the patch but if others like it I will not block it. > > > > Agreed. Very strongly agreed: I found it hard to be as polite as you have been. Hugh