(2012/06/18 22:30), Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 18-06-12 20:57:23, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: >> 2 follow-up patches for "memcg: move charges to root cgroup if use_hierarchy=0", >> developped/tested onto memcg-devel tree. Maybe no HUNK with -next and -mm.... >> -Kame >> == >> memcg: remove -EINTR at rmdir() >> >> By commit "memcg: move charges to root cgroup if use_hierarchy=0", >> no memory reclaiming will occur at removing memory cgroup. > > OK, so the there are only 2 reasons why move_parent could fail in this > path. 1) it races with somebody else who is uncharging or moving the > charge and 2) THP split. > 1) works for us and 2) doens't seem to be serious enough to expect that > it would stall rmdir on the group for unbound amount of time so the > change is safe (can we make this into the changelog please?). > Yes. But the failure of move_parent() (-EBUSY) will be retried. Remaining problems are - attaching task while pre_destroy() is called. - creating child cgroup while pre_destroy() is called. I think I need to make a patch for cgroup layer as I previously posted. I'd like to try again. 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/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>