On 09/27/2012 05:34 PM, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 06:04:02PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: >> This flag is used to indicate to the callees that this allocation is a >> kernel allocation in process context, and should be accounted to >> current's memcg. It takes numerical place of the of the recently removed >> __GFP_NO_KSWAPD. >> >> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> CC: Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx> >> CC: Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> CC: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx> >> CC: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> CC: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@xxxxxxxxxx> >> CC: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> >> CC: Mel Gorman <mel@xxxxxxxxx> >> Acked-by: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > I agree with Christophs recommendation that this flag always exist instead > of being 0 in the !MEMCG_KMEM case. If __GFP_KMEMCG ever is used in another > part of the VM (which would be unexpected but still) then the behaviour > might differ too much between MEMCG_KMEM and !MEMCG_KMEM cases. As unlikely > as the case is, it's not impossible. > > For tracing __GFP_KMEMCG should have an entry in > include/trace/events/gfpflags.h > > Get rid of the CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM check and update > include/trace/events/gfpflags.h and then feel free to stick my Acked-by > on it. > Thanks, that is certainly doable. -- 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>