On 3/8/22 19:17, Roman Gushchin wrote:
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 10:41:38AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
On 3/7/22 23:39, Roman Gushchin wrote:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 10:30:09PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
Since commit 2c80cd57c743 ("mm/list_lru.c: fix list_lru_count_node()
to be race free"), we are tracking the total number of lru
entries in a list_lru_node in its nr_items field. In the case of
memcg_drain_list_lru_node(), there is nothing to be done if nr_items
is 0. We don't even need to take the nlru->lock as no new lru entry
could be added by a racing list_lru_add() to the draining src_idx memcg
at this point.
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@xxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Waiman!
The patch makes total sense to me, however it needs to be rebased at least
on top of "mm: list_lru: rename memcg_drain_all_list_lrus to memcg_reparent_list_lrus".
Thanks!
This patch was based on the current linux-next tree which includes commit
ff221bc26bdd ("mm: list_lru: rename memcg_drain_all_list_lrus to
memcg_reparent_list_lrus"). I do remember to double-check linux-next before
sending this patch out. In fact, the same patch can be applied to both linux
and linux-next tree without problem.
I'm looking at the mm tree (https://github.com/hnaz/linux-mm.git) and clearly
see that commit "mm: list_lru: rename memcg_drain_all_list_lrus to
memcg_reparent_list_lrus" eliminated the function with the name
memcg_drain_list_lru_node(), which your patch is touching.
Currently the function is located in list_lru.c and is named
memcg_reparent_list_lru_node().
linux-next is sometimes a bit behind the mm tree.
Oh, you are right. I will rebase the patch based on linux-mm.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Cheers,
Longman
