On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 08:00:07PM +0800, Sha Zhengju wrote:
> @@ -6303,6 +6360,49 @@ mem_cgroup_css_online(struct cgroup *cont)
> }
>
> error = memcg_init_kmem(memcg, &mem_cgroup_subsys);
> + if (!error) {
> + if (!mem_cgroup_in_use()) {
> + /* I'm the first non-root memcg, move global stats to root memcg.
> + * Memcg creating is serialized by cgroup locks(cgroup_mutex),
> + * so the mem_cgroup_in_use() checking is safe.
> + *
> + * We use global_page_state() to get global page stats, but
> + * because of the optimized inc/dec functions in SMP while
> + * updating each zone's stats, We may lose some numbers
> + * in a stock(zone->pageset->vm_stat_diff) which brings some
> + * inaccuracy. But places where kernel use these page stats to
> + * steer next decision e.g. dirty page throttling or writeback
> + * also use global_page_state(), so here it's enough too.
> + */
> + spin_lock(&root_mem_cgroup->pcp_counter_lock);
> + root_mem_cgroup->stats_base.count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_FILE_MAPPED] =
> + global_page_state(NR_FILE_MAPPED);
> + root_mem_cgroup->stats_base.count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_FILE_DIRTY] =
> + global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY);
> + root_mem_cgroup->stats_base.count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_WRITEBACK] =
> + global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK);
> + spin_unlock(&root_mem_cgroup->pcp_counter_lock);
> + }
If inaccuracies in these counters are okay, why do we go through an
elaborate locking scheme that sprinkles memcg callbacks everywhere
just to be 100% reliable in the rare case somebody moves memory
between cgroups?
--
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>