Re: [-mm] Add an owner to the mm_struct (v2)

Paul Menage
2008-03-28T11:04:18Z

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 3:52 AM, Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > How about changing this css_get()/css_put() from accounting against mm_struct
> > to accouting against task_struct ?
> > It seems simpler way after this mm->owner change.
>
> But the reason why we account the mem_cgroup is that we don't want the
> mem_cgroup to be deleted. I hope you meant mem_cgroup instead of mm_struct.
>

If there are any tasks in the cgroup then the cgroup can't be deleted,
and hence the mem_cgroup is safe.

css_get()/css_put() is only needed when you have a reference from a
non-task object that needs to keep the mem_cgroup alive, which is no
longer the case for mm_struct once we have mm->owner.

Paul