On Mon 29-10-12 17:48:00, Glauber Costa wrote: > On 10/26/2012 03:37 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > The root cgroup cannot be destroyed so we never hit it down the > > mem_cgroup_pre_destroy path and mem_cgroup_force_empty_write shouldn't > > even try to do anything if called for the root. > > > > This means that mem_cgroup_move_parent doesn't have to bother with the > > root cgroup and it can assume it can always move charges upwards. > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> > > I think it would be safer to have this folded in the last patch, to > avoid a weird intermediate state (specially for force_empty). force_empty excludes root cgroup explicitly so there is no way to fail here. I have kept VM_BUG_ON for future reference but it also can go away completely. > Being a single statement, it doesn't confuse review so much. > > However, this is also pretty much just a nitpick, do as you prefer. > > Reviewed-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- 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>