On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 09:04:06PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 19:36:31 +0900
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:24:42 +0100
> > Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > What I think is required is to break up the charging and committing
> > > like we do for swap cache already:
> > >
> > > if (!mem_cgroup_try_charge())
> > > goto error;
> > > page_add_new_anon_rmap()
> > > mem_cgroup_commit()
> > >
> > > This will also allow us to even get rid of passing around the charge
> > > type everywhere...
> > >
> >
> > Thank you. I'll look into.
> >
> > To be honest, I want to remove 'rss' and 'cache' counter ;(
> > This doesn't have much meanings after lru was splitted.
> >
>
> I'll use this version for test. This patch is under far deep stacks of
> unmerged patches, anyway.
Ok, makes sense. I can do the PCG_CACHE removal, btw, I have half the
patches sitting around anyway, just need to fix up huge_memory.c.
> @@ -2938,9 +2948,13 @@ void mem_cgroup_uncharge_page(struct page *page)
>
> void mem_cgroup_uncharge_cache_page(struct page *page)
> {
> + int ctype = MEM_CGROUP_CHARGE_TYPE_CACHE;
> VM_BUG_ON(page_mapped(page));
> VM_BUG_ON(page->mapping);
> - __mem_cgroup_uncharge_common(page, MEM_CGROUP_CHARGE_TYPE_CACHE);
> +
> + if (page_is_file_cache(page))
> + ctype = MEM_CGROUP_CHARGE_TYPE_SHMEM;
> + __mem_cgroup_uncharge_common(page, ctype);
I think this is missing a negation, but it doesn't matter because the
SHMEM and CACHE charge types are treated exactly the same way. I'll
send a patch series that removes it soon, there is more shmem related
things...
--
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>