From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1761808Ab3DCIaU (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 3 Apr 2013 04:30:20 -0400
Received: from mx2.parallels.com ([199.115.105.18]:35976 "EHLO
	mx2.parallels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1761772Ab3DCIaQ (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 3 Apr 2013 04:30:16 -0400
Message-ID: <515BE8C3.6040205@parallels.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 12:30:59 +0400
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130311 Thunderbird/17.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
CC: Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] memcg: don't do cleanup manually if mem_cgroup_css_online()
 fails
References: <515A8A40.6020406@huawei.com> <20130402121600.GK24345@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20130402141646.GQ24345@dhcp22.suse.cz> <515AE948.1000704@parallels.com> <20130402142825.GA32520@dhcp22.suse.cz> <515AEC3A.2030401@parallels.com> <20130402150422.GB32520@dhcp22.suse.cz> <515BA6C9.2000704@huawei.com> <20130403074300.GA14384@dhcp22.suse.cz> <515BDEF2.1080900@huawei.com> <20130403081843.GC14384@dhcp22.suse.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20130403081843.GC14384@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 04/03/2013 12:18 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Dang. You are right! Glauber, is there any reason why
> memcg_kmem_mark_dead checks only KMEM_ACCOUNTED_ACTIVE rather than
> KMEM_ACCOUNTED_MASK?
> 
> This all is very confusing to say the least.
Yes, it is.

In kmemcg we need to differentiate between "active" and "activated"
states due to static branches management. This is only important in the
first activation, to make sure the static branches patching are
synchronized.

>>From this point on, the ACTIVE flag is the one we should be looking at.

Again, I fully agree it is complicated, but being that a property of the
static branches (we tried to fix it in the static branches itself but
without a lot of luck, since by their design they patch one site at a
time). I tried to overcome this by testing handcrafted errors and
documenting the states as well as I could.

But that not always work *that* well. Maybe we can use the results of
this discussion to document the tear down process a bit more?