From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx108.postini.com [74.125.245.108]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5112D6B0005 for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 03:38:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 09:38:28 +0100 From: Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] memcg: split part of memcg creation to css_online Message-ID: <20130121083828.GB7798@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1357897527-15479-1-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <1357897527-15479-3-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <20130118152526.GF10701@dhcp22.suse.cz> <50FCEF40.8040709@parallels.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50FCEF40.8040709@parallels.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Glauber Costa Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, Johannes Weiner , Tejun Heo On Mon 21-01-13 11:33:20, Glauber Costa wrote: > On 01/18/2013 07:25 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > >> - spin_lock_init(&memcg->move_lock); > >> > + memcg->swappiness = mem_cgroup_swappiness(parent); > > Please move this up to oom_kill_disable and use_hierarchy > > initialization. > > One thing: wouldn't moving it to inside use_hierarchy be a change of > behavior here? I do not see how it would change the behavior. But maybe I wasn't clear enough. I just wanted to make all three: memcg->use_hierarchy = parent->use_hierarchy; memcg->oom_kill_disable = parent->oom_kill_disable; memcg->swappiness = mem_cgroup_swappiness(parent); in the same visual block so that we can split the function into three parts. Inherited values which don't depend on use_hierarchy, those that depend on use_hierarchy and the rest that depends on the previous decisions (kmem e.g.). Makes sense? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- 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