On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:33:16 -0700, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 12:37:06 +0530
> "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > +static int mem_cgroup_hugetlb_usage(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> > +{
> > + int idx;
> > + for (idx = 0; idx < hugetlb_max_hstate; idx++) {
> > + if (memcg->hugepage[idx].usage > 0)
> > + return memcg->hugepage[idx].usage;
> > + }
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> Please document the function? Had you done this, I might have been
> able to work out why the function bales out on the first used hugepage
> size, but I can't :(
I guess the function is named wrongly. I will rename it to
mem_cgroup_have_hugetlb_usage() in the next iteration ? The function
will return (bool) 1 if it has any hugetlb resource usage.
>
> This could have used for_each_hstate(), had that macro been better
> designed (or updated).
>
Can you explain this ?. for_each_hstate allows to iterate over
different hstates. But here we need to look at different hugepage
rescounter in memcg. I can still use for_each_hstate() and find the
hstate index (h - hstates) and use that to index memcg rescounter
array. But that would make it more complex ?
> Upon return this function coerces an unsigned long long into an "int".
> We decided last week that more than 2^32 hugepages was not
> inconceivable, so I guess that's a bug.
>
-aneesh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
