On Wed 15-07-15 13:57:11, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 13:14:41 +0200 Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > mem_cgroup structure is defined in mm/memcontrol.c currently which
> > means that the code outside of this file has to use external API even
> > for trivial access stuff.
> >
> > This patch exports mm_struct with its dependencies and makes some of the
> > exported functions inlines. This even helps to reduce the code size a bit
> > (make defconfig + CONFIG_MEMCG=y)
> >
> > text data bss dec hex filename
> > 12355346 1823792 1089536 15268674 e8fb42 vmlinux.before
> > 12354970 1823792 1089536 15268298 e8f9ca vmlinux.after
> >
> > This is not much (370B) but better than nothing. We also save a function
> > call in some hot paths like callers of mem_cgroup_count_vm_event which is
> > used for accounting.
> >
> > The patch doesn't introduce any functional changes.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > include/linux/memcontrol.h | 369 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>
> Boy, that's a ton of new stuff into the header file. Do we actually
> *need* to expose all this?
I am exporting struct mem_cgroup with its dependencies + some small
functions which allow to inline some really trivial code and helps to
generate a better code.
> Is some other patch dependent on it?
Without mem_cgroup visible outside of memcontrol.c we couldn't inline
and now we can also use some fields from mem_cgroup directly and get rid
of some really trivial access functions.
> If
> not then perhaps we shouldn't do this - if the code was already this
> way, I'd be attracted to a patch which was the reverse of this one!
I agree with Johannes who originally suggested to expose mem_cgroup that
it will allow for a better code later.
> There's some risk of build breakage here - just from a quick scan,
> memcontrol.h is going to need eventfd.h for eventfd_ctx. But what else
> is needed?
I have tested this with all{mod,yes,no}config + my battery of configs
which I am using for mm git tree testing + some randconfig without
issues. Sure there might be some config combo I haven't tested but I
guess it should be quite unlikely.
--
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>