On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 08:30:40AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 01:36:10PM +0100, Roman Gushchin wrote: > > @@ -59,6 +59,12 @@ enum memcg_memory_event { > > MEMCG_NR_MEMORY_EVENTS, > > }; > > > > +enum mem_cgroup_protection { > > + MEMCG_PROT_NONE, > > + MEMCG_PROT_LOW, > > + MEMCG_PROT_HIGH, > > Ha, HIGH doesn't make much sense, but I went back and it's indeed what > I suggested. Must have been a brainfart. This should be > > MEMCG_PROT_NONE, > MEMCG_PROT_LOW, > MEMCG_PROT_MIN > > right? To indicate which type of protection is applying. Hm, I wasn't actually sure if it was a typo or not :) But I thought that MEMCG_PROT_HIGH means a higher level of protection than MEMCG_PROT_LOW, which sounds reasonable. So, I'm fine with either option. > > The rest of the patch looks good: > > Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Thanks! Can you, also, please, take a look at this one: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/24/703. Thank you!