* Ryo Tsuruta <ryov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2009-07-22 17:28:43]:
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > Index: linux-2.6.31-rc3/include/linux/page_cgroup.h
> > > > > ===================================================================
> > > > > --- linux-2.6.31-rc3.orig/include/linux/page_cgroup.h
> > > > > +++ linux-2.6.31-rc3/include/linux/page_cgroup.h
> > > > > @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> > > > > #ifndef __LINUX_PAGE_CGROUP_H
> > > > > #define __LINUX_PAGE_CGROUP_H
> > > > >
> > > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR
> > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_PAGE
> > > > > #include <linux/bit_spinlock.h>
> > > > > /*
> > > > > * Page Cgroup can be considered as an extended mem_map.
> > > > > @@ -12,9 +12,11 @@
> > > > > */
> > > > > struct page_cgroup {
> > > > > unsigned long flags;
> > > > > - struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroup;
> > > > > struct page *page;
> > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR
> > > > > + struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroup;
> > > > > struct list_head lru; /* per cgroup LRU list */
> > > > > +#endif
> > > > > };
> > > >
> > > > If CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR is not enabled and CGROUP_PAGE is
> > > > (assuming that the depends on below is refactored), what would this
> > > > change buy us? What is page_cgroup helping us track, the mem_cgroup is
> > > > factored out, so we are interested in the flags only?
> > > >
> > > plz remove CONFIG. This jsut makes code complicated.
> > > or plz use your own infrastructure, not depends on page_cgroup.
>
> Thanks for reviewing the patch.
> Do you mean that remove only CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTR in struct
> page_cgroup? Is it OK to define CONFIG_CGROUP_PAGE?
>
> > BTW, you can't modify page_cgroup->flags bit without cmpxchg.
> > Then, patch [5/9] is completely broken, now because new bit is used
> > with atomic bit ops but without lock_page_cgroup(). (see mmotm)
> >
> > Why struct page's flags bit can includes zone id etc...is just because
> > it's initalized before using. Anyway, this is "flags" bit. If you want
> > to modify multiple bit at once, plz use cmpxchg.
> > Then, I buy patch [8/9] and just skip this patch.
>
> O.K. I'll use cmpxchg.
>
> > But, following is more straightforward. (and what you do is not different
> > from this.)
> > ==
> > struct page {
> > .....
> > #ifdef CONFIG_BLOCKIO_CGROUP
> > void *blockio_cgroup;
> > #endif
> > }
> > ==
>
> This increases the size of struct page. Could I get a consensus on
> this approach?
>
This defeats the entire purpose of page_cgroup, IMHO. You need to add
the cgroup pointer to page_cgroup or use css id's there.
> Thanks,
> Ryo Tsuruta
>
> > Regards,
> > -Kame
> >
> >
--
Balbir
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
