The patch titled Subject: memcg: add comments clarifying aspects of cache attribute propagation has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was memcg-add-comments-clarifying-aspects-of-cache-attribute-propagation.patch This patch was dropped because it was merged into mainline or a subsystem tree ------------------------------------------------------ From: Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: memcg: add comments clarifying aspects of cache attribute propagation This patch clarifies two aspects of cache attribute propagation. First, the expected context for the for_each_memcg_cache macro in memcontrol.h. The usages already in the codebase are safe. In mm/slub.c, it is trivially safe because the lock is acquired right before the loop. In mm/slab.c, it is less so: the lock is acquired by an outer function a few steps back in the stack, so a VM_BUG_ON() is added to make sure it is indeed safe. A comment is also added to detail why we are returning the value of the parent cache and ignoring the children's when we propagate the attributes. Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx> Cc: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- include/linux/memcontrol.h | 6 ++++++ mm/slab.c | 1 + mm/slub.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++---- 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff -puN include/linux/memcontrol.h~memcg-add-comments-clarifying-aspects-of-cache-attribute-propagation include/linux/memcontrol.h --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h~memcg-add-comments-clarifying-aspects-of-cache-attribute-propagation +++ a/include/linux/memcontrol.h @@ -422,6 +422,12 @@ static inline void sock_release_memcg(st extern struct static_key memcg_kmem_enabled_key; extern int memcg_limited_groups_array_size; + +/* + * Helper macro to loop through all memcg-specific caches. Callers must still + * check if the cache is valid (it is either valid or NULL). + * the slab_mutex must be held when looping through those caches + */ #define for_each_memcg_cache_index(_idx) \ for ((_idx) = 0; i < memcg_limited_groups_array_size; (_idx)++) diff -puN mm/slab.c~memcg-add-comments-clarifying-aspects-of-cache-attribute-propagation mm/slab.c --- a/mm/slab.c~memcg-add-comments-clarifying-aspects-of-cache-attribute-propagation +++ a/mm/slab.c @@ -4099,6 +4099,7 @@ static int do_tune_cpucache(struct kmem_ if ((ret < 0) || !is_root_cache(cachep)) return ret; + VM_BUG_ON(!mutex_is_locked(&slab_mutex)); for_each_memcg_cache_index(i) { c = cache_from_memcg(cachep, i); if (c) diff -puN mm/slub.c~memcg-add-comments-clarifying-aspects-of-cache-attribute-propagation mm/slub.c --- a/mm/slub.c~memcg-add-comments-clarifying-aspects-of-cache-attribute-propagation +++ a/mm/slub.c @@ -5108,12 +5108,25 @@ static ssize_t slab_attr_store(struct ko if (s->max_attr_size < len) s->max_attr_size = len; + /* + * This is a best effort propagation, so this function's return + * value will be determined by the parent cache only. This is + * basically because not all attributes will have a well + * defined semantics for rollbacks - most of the actions will + * have permanent effects. + * + * Returning the error value of any of the children that fail + * is not 100 % defined, in the sense that users seeing the + * error code won't be able to know anything about the state of + * the cache. + * + * Only returning the error code for the parent cache at least + * has well defined semantics. The cache being written to + * directly either failed or succeeded, in which case we loop + * through the descendants with best-effort propagation. + */ for_each_memcg_cache_index(i) { struct kmem_cache *c = cache_from_memcg(s, i); - /* - * This function's return value is determined by the - * parent cache only - */ if (c) attribute->store(c, buf, len); } _ Patches currently in -mm which might be from glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx are origin.patch memcg-debugging-facility-to-access-dangling-memcgs.patch memcg-debugging-facility-to-access-dangling-memcgs-fix.patch -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe mm-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html