(2012/04/17 7:30), Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 08:22:42PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: >> As recently discussed, Tejun Heo, the cgroup maintainer, tries to >> remove ->pre_destroy() and cgroup will never return -EBUSY at rmdir(). > > I'm not trying to remove ->pre_destory() per-se. I want to remove css > ref draining and ->pre_destroy() vetoing cgroup removal. Probably > better wording would be "tries to simplify removal path such that > removal always succeeds". > Ok. >> To do that, in memcg, handling case of use_hierarchy==false is a problem. >> >> We move memcg's charges to its parent at rmdir(). If use_hierarchy==true, >> it's already accounted in the parent, no problem. If use_hierarchy==false, >> we cannot guarantee we can move all charges to the parent. >> >> This patch changes the behavior to move all charges to root_mem_cgroup >> if use_hierarchy=false. It seems this matches semantics of use_hierarchy==false,which means parent and child has no hierarchical relationship. > > Maybe better to break the above line? > yes, I'll fix it. 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>