Re: [PATCH REBASED] mm, memcg: Make scan aggression always exclude protection

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Michal Hocko writes:
Maybe I am missing something so correct me if I am wrong but the new
calculation actually means that we always allow to scan even min
protected memcgs right?

We check if the memcg is min protected as a precondition for coming into this function at all, so this generally isn't possible. See the mem_cgroup_protected MEMCG_PROT_MIN check in shrink_node.

(Of course, it's possible we race with going within protection thresholds again, but this patch doesn't make that any better or worse than the previous situation.)



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [Monitors]

  Powered by Linux