From: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: move the high field from struct mem_cgroup to page_counter
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 13:41:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180423124145.GA29016@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180420205450.GB24563@cmpxchg.org>
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 04:54:50PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 05:36:32PM +0100, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > We do store memory.min, memory.low and memory.max actual values
> > in struct page_counter fields, while memory.high value is located
> > in the struct mem_cgroup directly, which is not very consistent.
> >
> > This patch moves the high field from struct mem_cgroup to
> > struct page_counter to simplify the code and make handling
> > of all limits/boundaries clearer.
>
> I would prefer not doing this.
>
> Yes, it looks a bit neater if all these things are next to each other
> in the struct, but on the other hand it separates the high variable
> from high_work, and it adds an unnecessary setter function as well.
>
> Plus, nothing in the page_counter code actually uses the value, it
> really isn't part of that abstraction layer.
>
Ok, not a problem.
It's nice to have all 4 limits in one place, but separating
high and high_work isn't good, I agree. Let's leave it as it is.
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-23 12:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-20 16:36 [PATCH 1/2] mm: introduce memory.min Roman Gushchin
2018-04-20 16:36 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm: move the high field from struct mem_cgroup to page_counter Roman Gushchin
2018-04-20 20:54 ` Johannes Weiner
2018-04-23 12:41 ` Roman Gushchin [this message]
2018-04-20 17:01 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: introduce memory.min Randy Dunlap
2018-04-20 17:20 ` Roman Gushchin
2018-04-20 17:29 ` Randy Dunlap
2018-04-20 20:44 ` Johannes Weiner
2018-04-23 12:44 ` Roman Gushchin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180423124145.GA29016@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com \
--to=guro@fb.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).