From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx132.postini.com [74.125.245.132]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4BF696B0007 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 13:38:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 13:37:53 -0500 From: Johannes Weiner Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] memcg: reduce the size of struct memcg 244-fold. Message-ID: <20130205183753.GA6481@cmpxchg.org> References: <1359009996-5350-1-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <20130124155105.85dae9d9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130124155105.85dae9d9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Greg Thelen , Glauber Costa , linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Michal Hocko , Kamezawa Hiroyuki , Hugh Dickins , Ying Han , Mel Gorman , Rik van Riel On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 03:51:05PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 23:50:31 -0800 > Greg Thelen wrote: > > > > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c > > > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c > > > @@ -172,7 +172,7 @@ struct mem_cgroup_per_node { > > > }; > > > > > > struct mem_cgroup_lru_info { > > > - struct mem_cgroup_per_node *nodeinfo[MAX_NUMNODES]; > > > + struct mem_cgroup_per_node *nodeinfo[0]; > > > > It seems like a VM_BUG_ON() in mem_cgroup_zoneinfo() asserting that the > > nid index is less than nr_node_ids would be good at catching illegal > > indexes. I don't see any illegal indexes in your patch, but I fear that > > someday a MAX_NUMNODES based for() loop might sneak in. > > Can't hurt ;) > > > Tangential question: why use inline here? I figure that modern > > compilers are good at making inlining decisions. > > And that'll save some disk space. > > This? > > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c~memcg-reduce-the-size-of-struct-memcg-244-fold-fix > +++ a/mm/memcontrol.c > @@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ enum { > ((1 << KMEM_ACCOUNTED_ACTIVE) | (1 << KMEM_ACCOUNTED_ACTIVATED)) > > #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM > -static inline void memcg_kmem_set_active(struct mem_cgroup *memcg) > +static void memcg_kmem_set_active(struct mem_cgroup *memcg) > { > set_bit(KMEM_ACCOUNTED_ACTIVE, &memcg->kmem_account_flags); > } I don't disapprove, but it's the wrong function for this patch. Should be memcg_size(). -- 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