From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mt1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.74]) by fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id mAD2nmfi027048 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:49:48 +0900 Received: from smail (m4 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7522445DD79 for ; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:49:48 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.94]) by m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53C1745DD78 for ; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:49:48 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3788B1DB803A for ; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:49:48 +0900 (JST) Received: from m106.s.css.fujitsu.com (m106.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.106]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5C7A1DB803B for ; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:49:44 +0900 (JST) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:49:08 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/6] memcg: free all at rmdir Message-Id: <20081113114908.42a6a8a7.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20081112160758.3dca0b22.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20081112122606.76051530.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20081112122656.c6e56248.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20081112160758.3dca0b22.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp, menage@google.com List-ID: On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 16:07:58 -0800 Andrew Morton wrote: > If we do this then we can make the above "keep" behaviour non-optional, > and the operator gets to choose whether or not to drop the caches > before doing the rmdir. > > Plus, we get a new per-memcg drop_caches capability. And it's a nicer > interface, and it doesn't have the obvious races which on_rmdir has, > etc. > > hm? > Balbir, how would you want to do ? I planned to post shrink_uage patch later (it's easy to be implemented) regardless of acceptance of this patch. So, I think we should add shrink_usage now and drop this is a way to go. I think I can prepare patch soon. But I'd like to push handle-swap-cache patch before introducing shrink_usage. Then, posting following 2 patch for this week is my current intention. [1/2] handle swap cache [2/2] shrink_usage patch (instead of this patch) Objection ? 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