From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qg0-f46.google.com (mail-qg0-f46.google.com [209.85.192.46]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81E666B0074 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 13:49:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: by qgeu36 with SMTP id u36so28597949qge.2 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:49:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x22b.google.com (mail-qk0-x22b.google.com. [2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22b]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f31si8374110qkh.15.2015.06.18.10.49.33 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:49:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qkhu186 with SMTP id u186so48086391qkh.0 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:49:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 13:49:30 -0400 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/51] memcg: add mem_cgroup_root_css Message-ID: <20150618174930.GA12934@mtj.duckdns.org> References: <1432329245-5844-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <1432329245-5844-7-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <20150617145642.GI25056@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20150617182500.GI22637@mtj.duckdns.org> <20150618111227.GA5858@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150618111227.GA5858@dhcp22.suse.cz> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jack@suse.cz, hch@infradead.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, vgoyal@redhat.com, lizefan@huawei.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, clm@fb.com, fengguang.wu@intel.com, david@fromorbit.com, gthelen@google.com, khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru Hello, Michal. On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 01:12:27PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: ... > I see and yes, it makes some sense. I just think we can get rid of the > accessor functions when the struct mem_cgroup is visible and the code > can simply do &{page->}mem_cgroup->css. As long as the accessors are inline, I think it should be fine. > I have tried to compile with !CONFIG_MEMCG and !CONFIG_CGROUP_WRITEBACK > without mem_cgroup_root_css defined for this configuration and > mm/backing-dev.c compiles just fine. So maybe we should get rid of it > rather than have a potentially tricky code? Yeah, please feel free to queue a patch to remove it if doesn't break anything. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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