On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 3:43 PM Vasily Averin <vvs@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 4/27/22 18:06, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 5:22 AM Michal Koutný <mkoutny@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 10:23:32PM -0700, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> [...]
> >>>>
> >>>> +static inline struct mem_cgroup *get_mem_cgroup_from_obj(void *p)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
> >>>> +
> >>>
> >>> Do we need memcg_kmem_enabled() check here or maybe
> >>> mem_cgroup_from_obj() should be doing memcg_kmem_enabled() instead of
> >>> mem_cgroup_disabled() as we can have "cgroup.memory=nokmem" boot
> >>> param.
>
> Shakeel, unfortunately I'm not ready to answer this question right now.
> I even did not noticed that memcg_kmem_enabled() and mem_cgroup_disabled()
> have a different nature.
> If you have no objections I'm going to keep this place as is and investigate
> this question later.
>
Patch is good as is. Just add the documentation to the functions in
the next version and you can keep the ACKs.
