+/*
* A helper function to get mem_cgroup from ID. must be called under
* rcu_read_lock(). The caller must check css_is_removed() or some if
* it's concern. (dropping refcnt from swap can be called against removed
@@ -2677,16 +2695,28 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_parent(struct page *page,
nr_pages = hpage_nr_pages(page);
parent = mem_cgroup_from_cont(pcg);
- ret = __mem_cgroup_try_charge(NULL, gfp_mask, nr_pages,&parent, false);
- if (ret)
- goto put_back;
+ if (!parent->use_hierarchy) {
Can we avoid testing for use hierarchy ?
Specially given this might go away.
parent_mem_cgroup() already bundles this information. So maybe we can
test for parent_mem_cgroup(parent) == NULL. It is the same thing after all.
+ ret = __mem_cgroup_try_charge(NULL,
+ gfp_mask, nr_pages,&parent, false);
+ if (ret)
+ goto put_back;
+ }
Why? If we are not hierarchical, we should not charge the parent, right?
This is how it is implemented today and I think he changed that to
move to root on the next patch.
Yeah, I was under the impression that that was the idea, but I might
have missed one of the patches
--
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>