On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 3:23 AM Vasily Averin <vvs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [...] > > > > Can you please also change in_interrupt() in active_memcg() as well? > > There are other unrelated in_interrupt() in that file but the one in > > active_memcg() should be coupled with this change. > > Could you please elaborate? > From my point of view active_memcg is paired with set_active_memcg() and is not related to this case. > active_memcg uses memcg that was set by set_active_memcg(), either from int_active_memcg per-cpu pointer > or from current->active_memcg pointer. > I'm agree, it in case of disabled BH it is incorrect to use int_active_memcg, > we still can use current->active_memcg. However it isn't a problem, > memcg will be properly provided in both cases. > > I think it's better to fix set_active_memcg/active_memcg by separate patch. > > Am I missed something perhaps? > No you are right. That should be a separate patch.
