From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-f170.google.com (mail-ig0-f170.google.com [209.85.213.170]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B2426B02AA for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 16:57:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: by igvi1 with SMTP id i1so86526974igv.1 for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 13:57:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org (mail.linuxfoundation.org. [140.211.169.12]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a79si4651823ioj.25.2015.07.15.13.57.12 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 15 Jul 2015 13:57:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 13:57:11 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] memcg: export struct mem_cgroup Message-Id: <20150715135711.1778a8c08f2ea9560a7c1f6f@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <1436958885-18754-2-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> References: <1436958885-18754-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> <1436958885-18754-2-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: Johannes Weiner , Vladimir Davydov , Tejun Heo , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML , Michal Hocko On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 13:14:41 +0200 Michal Hocko wrote: > mem_cgroup structure is defined in mm/memcontrol.c currently which > means that the code outside of this file has to use external API even > for trivial access stuff. > > This patch exports mm_struct with its dependencies and makes some of the > exported functions inlines. This even helps to reduce the code size a bit > (make defconfig + CONFIG_MEMCG=y) > > text data bss dec hex filename > 12355346 1823792 1089536 15268674 e8fb42 vmlinux.before > 12354970 1823792 1089536 15268298 e8f9ca vmlinux.after > > This is not much (370B) but better than nothing. We also save a function > call in some hot paths like callers of mem_cgroup_count_vm_event which is > used for accounting. > > The patch doesn't introduce any functional changes. > > ... > > include/linux/memcontrol.h | 369 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- Boy, that's a ton of new stuff into the header file. Do we actually *need* to expose all this? Is some other patch dependent on it? If not then perhaps we shouldn't do this - if the code was already this way, I'd be attracted to a patch which was the reverse of this one! There's some risk of build breakage here - just from a quick scan, memcontrol.h is going to need eventfd.h for eventfd_ctx. But what else is needed? -- 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