On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 04:04:42PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> (2012/04/17 7:31), Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 08:20:06PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> >> +/*
> >> + * In hierarchical accounting, child's usage is accounted into ancestors.
> >> + * To move local usage to its parent, just forget current level usage.
> >> + */
> >> +void res_counter_move_parent(struct res_counter *counter, unsigned long val)
> >> +{
> >> + unsigned long flags;
> >> +
> >> + BUG_ON(!counter->parent);
> >> + spin_lock_irqsave(&counter->lock, flags);
> >> + res_counter_uncharge_locked(counter, val);
> >> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&counter->lock, flags);
> >> +}
> >
> > On the second thought, do we need this at all? It's as good as doing
> > nothing after all, no?
> >
>
>
> I considered that, but I think it may make it hard to debug memcg leakage.
> I'd like to confirm res->usage == 0 at removal of memcg.
Hmmm... then let's name it res_counter_reset() or something. I feel
very confused about the function name.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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>