From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.73]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id mBA34FBZ012017 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:04:15 +0900 Received: from smail (m3 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id E988E45DD80 for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:04:14 +0900 (JST) Received: from s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.93]) by m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C257B45DD7D for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:04:14 +0900 (JST) Received: from s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA3691DB803E for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:04:14 +0900 (JST) Received: from m105.s.css.fujitsu.com (m105.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.105]) by s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 540791DB8042 for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:04:11 +0900 (JST) Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:03:17 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/6] Flat hierarchical reclaim by ID Message-Id: <20081210120317.5dce40fa.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20081210024929.GG7593@balbir.in.ibm.com> References: <20081209200213.0e2128c1.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20081209200915.41917722.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20081209122731.GB4174@balbir.in.ibm.com> <3526.10.75.179.61.1228832912.squirrel@webmail-b.css.fujitsu.com> <20081209154612.GB7694@balbir.in.ibm.com> <36125.10.75.179.61.1228840454.squirrel@webmail-b.css.fujitsu.com> <20081210024929.GG7593@balbir.in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" , "lizf@cn.fujitsu.com" , "menage@google.com" , "kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-ID: On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 08:19:29 +0530 Balbir Singh wrote: > > >> >From implementation, hierarchy code management at el. should go into > > >> cgroup.c and it gives us clear view rather than implemented under memcg. > > >> > > > > > > cgroup has hierarchy management already, in the form of children and > > > sibling. Walking those structures is up to us, that is all we do > > > currently :) > > > > > yes, but need cgroup_lock(). and you have to keep refcnt to pointer > > just for rememebring it. > > > > This patch doesn't change anything other than removing cgroup_lock() and > > removing refcnt to remember start point. > > > > OK, I'll play with it > I hear Kosaki has another idea to 5/6. So please ignore 5/6 for a while. It's complicated. I'll post updated ones. -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