Re: [RFC][PATCH] oom: Be less verbose if the oom_control event fd has listeners

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 06/05, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>
> +int mem_cgroup_has_listeners(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> +{
> +	int ret = 0;
> +
> +	if (!memcg)
> +		goto out;
> +
> +	spin_lock(&memcg_oom_lock);
> +	ret = !list_empty(&memcg->oom_notify);
> +	spin_unlock(&memcg_oom_lock);
> +
> +out:
> +	return ret;
> +}

Do we really need memcg_oom_lock to check list_empty() ? With or without
this lock we can race with list_add/del anyway, and I guess we do not care.

And perhaps the caller should check memcg != NULL. but this is subjective,
I won't argue.

Oleg.

--
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>




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]