On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 12:04:48PM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> Currently we have two pairs of kmemcg-related functions that are called
> on slab alloc/free. The first is memcg_{bind,release}_pages that count
> the total number of pages allocated on a kmem cache. The second is
> memcg_{un}charge_slab that {un}charge slab pages to kmemcg resource
> counter. Let's just merge them to keep the code clean.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 4 ++--
> mm/memcontrol.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++--
> mm/slab.c | 2 --
> mm/slab.h | 25 ++-----------------------
> mm/slub.c | 2 --
> 5 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> index 087a45314181..d38d190f4cec 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> @@ -506,8 +506,8 @@ void memcg_update_array_size(int num_groups);
> struct kmem_cache *
> __memcg_kmem_get_cache(struct kmem_cache *cachep, gfp_t gfp);
>
> -int memcg_charge_kmem(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp, u64 size);
> -void memcg_uncharge_kmem(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, u64 size);
> +int __memcg_charge_slab(struct kmem_cache *cachep, gfp_t gfp, int order);
> +void __memcg_uncharge_slab(struct kmem_cache *cachep, int order);
I like the patch overall, but why the __prefix and not just
memcg_charge_slab() and memcg_uncharge_slab()?
Not a show stopper, though:
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
--
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>