On Mon, 27 Dec 2010, Ben Blum wrote: > > I think it would be appropriate to use a shared nodemask with file scope > > whenever you have cgroup_lock() to avoid the unnecessary kmalloc() even > > with GFP_KERNEL. Cpusets are traditionally used on very large machines in > > the first place, so there is a higher likelihood that > > CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT > 8 whenever CONFIG_CPUSETS is enabled. > > > > All users of NODEMASK_ALLOC() should be protected by cgroup_lock() other > > than cpuset_sprintf_memlist(), right? That should be the only remaining > > user of NODEMASK_ALLOC() and works well since it can return -ENOMEM. > > Just checked; that looks right. Perhaps I should add cgroup_is_locked() > in cgroup.c and BUG_ON() checks for it in those functions, too? > Sounds good, especially if it's coupled with a comment where the nodemasks are declared that specify that they are protected by the lock. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
