Re: [PATCH -mm] memcg: zap memcg_can_account_kmem

[Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>]

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 06:52:41PM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> memcg_can_account_kmem() returns true iff
> 
>     !mem_cgroup_disabled() && !mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg) &&
>                                    memcg_kmem_is_active(memcg);
> 
> To begin with the !mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg) check is useless, because
> one can't enable kmem accounting for the root cgroup (mem_cgroup_write()
> returns EINVAL on an attempt to set the limit on the root cgroup).
> 
> Furthermore, the !mem_cgroup_disabled() check also seems to be
> redundant. The point is memcg_can_account_kmem() is called from three
> places: mem_cgroup_salbinfo_read(), __memcg_kmem_get_cache(), and
> __memcg_kmem_newpage_charge(). The latter two functions are only invoked
> if memcg_kmem_enabled() returns true, which implies that the memory
> cgroup subsystem is enabled. And mem_cgroup_slabinfo_read() shows the
> output of memory.kmem.slabinfo, which won't exist if the memory cgroup
> is completely disabled.
> 
> So let's substitute all the calls to memcg_can_account_kmem() with plain
> memcg_kmem_is_active(), and kill the former.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@parallels.com>

Yes, the two checks look indeed redundant.

Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>