On Mon 21-01-13 11:33:20, Glauber Costa wrote: > On 01/18/2013 07:25 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > >> - spin_lock_init(&memcg->move_lock); > >> > + memcg->swappiness = mem_cgroup_swappiness(parent); > > Please move this up to oom_kill_disable and use_hierarchy > > initialization. > > One thing: wouldn't moving it to inside use_hierarchy be a change of > behavior here? I do not see how it would change the behavior. But maybe I wasn't clear enough. I just wanted to make all three: memcg->use_hierarchy = parent->use_hierarchy; memcg->oom_kill_disable = parent->oom_kill_disable; memcg->swappiness = mem_cgroup_swappiness(parent); in the same visual block so that we can split the function into three parts. Inherited values which don't depend on use_hierarchy, those that depend on use_hierarchy and the rest that depends on the previous decisions (kmem e.g.). Makes sense? -- 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>