On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 01:59:41PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 05-05-15 12:45:42, Vladimir Davydov wrote: > > Not all kmem allocations should be accounted to memcg. The following > > patch gives an example when accounting of a certain type of allocations > > to memcg can effectively result in a memory leak. > > > This patch adds the __GFP_NOACCOUNT flag which if passed to kmalloc > > and friends will force the allocation to go through the root > > cgroup. It will be used by the next patch. > > The name of the flag is way too generic. It is not clear that the > accounting is KMEMCG related. The memory controller is the (primary) component that accounts physical memory allocations in the kernel, so I don't see how this would be ambiguous in any way. > __GFP_NO_KMEMCG sounds better? I think that's much worse. I would prefer communicating the desired behavior directly instead of having to derive it from a subsystem name. (And KMEMCG should not even be a term, it's all just the memory controller, i.e. memcg.) -- 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>