KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 09:14:55 -0700
> Greg Thelen <gthelen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Add memcg routines to count dirty, writeback, and unstable_NFS pages.
>> These routines are not yet used by the kernel to count such pages. A
>> later change adds kernel calls to these new routines.
>>
>> As inode pages are marked dirty, if the dirtied page's cgroup differs
>> from the inode's cgroup, then mark the inode shared across several
>> cgroup.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen <gthelen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <andrea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> A nitpick..
>
>
>
>> +static inline
>> +void mem_cgroup_move_account_page_stat(struct mem_cgroup *from,
>> + struct mem_cgroup *to,
>> + enum mem_cgroup_stat_index idx)
>> +{
>> + preempt_disable();
>> + __this_cpu_dec(from->stat->count[idx]);
>> + __this_cpu_inc(to->stat->count[idx]);
>> + preempt_enable();
>> +}
>> +
>
> this_cpu_dec()
> this_cpu_inc()
>
> without preempt_disable/enable will work. CPU change between dec/inc will
> not be problem.
>
> Thanks,
> -Kame
I agree, but this fix is general cleanup, which seems independent of
memcg dirty accounting. This preemption disable/enable pattern exists
before this patch series in both mem_cgroup_charge_statistics() and
mem_cgroup_move_account(). For consistency we should change both. To
keep the dirty page accounting series simple, I would like to make these
changes outside of this series. On x86 usage of this_cpu_dec/inc looks
equivalent to __this_cpu_inc(), so I assume the only trade off is that
preemptible non-x86 using generic this_this_cpu() will internally
disable/enable preemption in this_cpu_*() operations.
I'll submit a cleanup patch outside of the dirty limit patches for this.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
