On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 17:39:03 -0200
Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 11/17/2011 07:35 PM, David Miller wrote:
> > TCP specific stuff in mm/memcontrol.c, at best that's not nice at all.
>
> How crucial is that? Thing is that as far as I am concerned, all the
> memcg people really want the inner layout of struct mem_cgroup to be
> private to memcontrol.c
This is just because memcg is just related to memory management and I don't
want it be wide spreaded, 'struct mem_cgroup' has been changed often.
But I don't like to have TCP code in memcgroup.c.
New idea is welcome.
> This means that at some point, we need to have
> at least a wrapper in memcontrol.c that is able to calculate the offset
> of the tcp structure, and since most functions are actually quite
> simple, that would just make us do more function calls.
>
> Well, an alternative to that would be to use a void pointer in the newly
> added struct cg_proto to an already parsed memcg-related field
> (in this case tcp_memcontrol), that would be passed to the functions
> instead of the whole memcg structure. Do you think this would be
> preferable ?
>
like this ?
struct mem_cgroup_sub_controls {
struct mem_cgroup *mem;
union {
struct tcp_mem_control tcp;
} data;
};
/* for loosely coupled controls for memcg */
struct memcg_sub_controls_function
{
struct memcg_sub_controls (*create)(struct mem_cgroup *);
struct memcg_sub_controls (*destroy)(struct mem_cgroup *);
}
int register_memcg_sub_controls(char *name,
struct memcg_sub_controls_function *abis);
struct mem_cgroup {
.....
.....
/* Root memcg will have no sub_controls! */
struct memcg_sub_controls *sub_controls[NR_MEMCG_SUB_CONTROLS];
}
Maybe some functions should be exported.
Thanks,
-Kame
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>