From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com (mail-wi0-f177.google.com [209.85.212.177]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 069D26B006E for ; Wed, 6 May 2015 09:16:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: by wiun10 with SMTP id n10so21984053wiu.1 for ; Wed, 06 May 2015 06:16:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gum.cmpxchg.org (gum.cmpxchg.org. [85.214.110.215]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p4si2210920wiy.6.2015.05.06.06.16.42 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 06 May 2015 06:16:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 09:16:22 -0400 From: Johannes Weiner Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] gfp: add __GFP_NOACCOUNT Message-ID: <20150506131622.GA4629@cmpxchg.org> References: <20150506115941.GH14550@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150506115941.GH14550@dhcp22.suse.cz> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: Vladimir Davydov , Andrew Morton , Tejun Heo , Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , Greg Thelen , linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 01:59:41PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 05-05-15 12:45:42, Vladimir Davydov wrote: > > Not all kmem allocations should be accounted to memcg. The following > > patch gives an example when accounting of a certain type of allocations > > to memcg can effectively result in a memory leak. > > > This patch adds the __GFP_NOACCOUNT flag which if passed to kmalloc > > and friends will force the allocation to go through the root > > cgroup. It will be used by the next patch. > > The name of the flag is way too generic. It is not clear that the > accounting is KMEMCG related. The memory controller is the (primary) component that accounts physical memory allocations in the kernel, so I don't see how this would be ambiguous in any way. > __GFP_NO_KMEMCG sounds better? I think that's much worse. I would prefer communicating the desired behavior directly instead of having to derive it from a subsystem name. (And KMEMCG should not even be a term, it's all just the memory controller, i.e. memcg.) -- 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