On 02/21/2013 03:00 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > (cc'ing cgroup / memcg people and quoting whole body) > > Looks like something is going wrong with memcg cache destruction. > Glauber, any ideas? Also, can we please not use names as generic as > kmem_cache_destroy_work_func for something specific to memcg? How > about something like memcg_destroy_cache_workfn? > I will take a look. Thanks for the report for the reportee: I tested cgroup deletion quite extensively (quite important feature for me) so it is nice to have an uncaught case. About naming, I can change, no problem. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
