On Tue, 29 May 2012, Glauber Costa wrote: > > Ok this only duplicates the kmalloc arrays. Why not the others? > > It does duplicate the others. > > First it does a while look on the kmalloc caches, then a list_for_each_entry > in the rest. You probably missed it. There is no need to separately duplicate the kmalloc_caches. Those are included on the cache_chain. > > > @@ -2543,7 +2564,12 @@ kmem_cache_create (const char *name, size_t size, > > > size_t align, > > > cachep->ctor = ctor; > > > cachep->name = name; > > > > > > + if (g_cpucache_up>= FULL) > > > + mem_cgroup_register_cache(memcg, cachep); > > > > What happens if a cgroup was active during creation of slab xxy but > > then a process running in a different cgroup uses that slab to allocate > > memory? Is it charged to the first cgroup? > > I don't see this situation ever happening. kmem_cache_create, when called > directly, will always create a global cache. It doesn't matter which cgroups > are or aren't active at this time or any other. We create copies per-cgroup, > but we create it lazily, when someone will touch it. How do you detect that someone is touching it? -- 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>