>>
>> static void drain_all_stock_async(struct mem_cgroup *memcg);
>> @@ -4344,8 +4358,13 @@ static int mem_cgroup_write(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft,
>> *
>> * But it is not worth the trouble
>> */
>> - if (!memcg->kmem_accounted&& val != RESOURCE_MAX)
>> + mutex_lock(&set_limit_mutex);
>> + if (!memcg->kmem_accounted&& val != RESOURCE_MAX
>> + && !memcg->kmem_accounted) {
>
> I'm sorry why you check the value twice ?
>
Hi Kame,
For no reason, it should be removed. I never noticed this because 1)
This is the kind of thing testing will never reveal, and 2), this
actually goes away in a later patch (memcg: propagate kmem limiting
information to children)
In any case, I will update my tree here.
Thanks for spotting this
--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>