On Tue 13-12-11 15:08:44, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 03:09:35PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > And a follow up patch for the proper clean up: > > --- > > >From 4b9f5a1e88496af9f336d1ef37cfdf3754a3ba48 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx> > > Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 15:04:18 +0100 > > Subject: [PATCH] memcg: clean up soft_limit_tree properly > > > > If we are not able to allocate tree nodes for all NUMA nodes then we > > should better clean up those that were allocated otherwise we will leak > > a memory. > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx> > > Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> Thanks > > That being said, I think it's unlikely that the machine even boots > properly if those allocations fail. But the code looks better this > way and one doesn't have to double take, wondering if anyone else is > taking care of the already allocated objects. Yes, that was the point of the patch - just a cleanup. I do not think we want to push it into stable... -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs SUSE LINUX s.r.o. Lihovarska 1060/12 190 00 Praha 9 Czech Republic -- 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>