On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 11:16:52AM GMT, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 23-10-24 23:57:12, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > The memcg v1's charge move feature has been deprecated. There is no need
> > to have any locking or protection against the moving charge. Let's
> > proceed to remove all the locking code related to charge moving.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > -/**
> > - * folio_memcg_lock - Bind a folio to its memcg.
> > - * @folio: The folio.
> > - *
> > - * This function prevents unlocked LRU folios from being moved to
> > - * another cgroup.
> > - *
> > - * It ensures lifetime of the bound memcg. The caller is responsible
> > - * for the lifetime of the folio.
> > - */
> > -void folio_memcg_lock(struct folio *folio)
> > -{
> > - struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
> > - unsigned long flags;
> > -
> > - /*
> > - * The RCU lock is held throughout the transaction. The fast
> > - * path can get away without acquiring the memcg->move_lock
> > - * because page moving starts with an RCU grace period.
> > - */
> > - rcu_read_lock();
>
> Is it safe to remove the implicit RCU?
Good question. I think it will be safe to keep the RCU in this patch and
in the followup examine each place and decide to remove RCU or not.
Thanks for the review.
