From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:58:56 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] dirty balancing for cgroups Message-Id: <20080818165856.0faeb0bb.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20080813071505.930965A75@siro.lan> References: <1218116168.8625.38.camel@twins> <20080813071505.930965A75@siro.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: YAMAMOTO Takashi Cc: a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, linux-mm@kvack.org, menage@google.com, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:15:05 +0900 (JST) yamamoto@valinux.co.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) wrote: > hi, > > > > @@ -485,7 +502,10 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_isolate_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan, > > > if (PageUnevictable(page) || > > > (PageActive(page) && !active) || > > > (!PageActive(page) && active)) { > > > - __mem_cgroup_move_lists(pc, page_lru(page)); > > > + if (try_lock_page_cgroup(page)) { > > > + __mem_cgroup_move_lists(pc, page_lru(page)); > > > + unlock_page_cgroup(page); > > > + } > > > continue; > > > } > > > > This chunk seems unrelated and lost.... > > it's necessary to protect from mem_cgroup_{set,clear}_dirty > which modify pc->flags without holding mz->lru_lock. > I'm now writing a patch to make page_cgroup->flags to be atomic_ops. Don't worry about this. (With remove-page-lock-cgroup patch, atomic_ops patch's performace is quite well.) Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org