From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Balbir Singh Subject: Re: [RFC][-mm] Add an owner to the mm_struct (v4) Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 10:02:25 +0530 Message-ID: <47F45DD9.4030004@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20080401124312.23664.64616.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <47F3D62E.4070808@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <6599ad830804021253y6bf3b37y9bf1167b63c32e70@mail.gmail.com> <47F4577E.5060905@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <6599ad830804022110h2090f3efg7c6173df8185679e@mail.gmail.com> Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <6599ad830804022110h2090f3efg7c6173df8185679e@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Paul Menage Cc: Pavel Emelianov , Hugh Dickins , Sudhir Kumar , YAMAMOTO Takashi , lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, taka@valinux.co.jp, linux-mm@kvack.org, David Rientjes , Andrew Morton , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki List-Id: linux-mm.kvack.org Paul Menage wrote: > On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 9:05 PM, Balbir Singh wrote: >> I checked to see that cgroup_exit is called after mm_update_new_owner(). We call >> mm_update_new_owner() from exit_mm(). I did not check for current->cgroups != >> new_owner->cgroups, since I did not want to limit the callbacks. > > No cgroup subsystem should be concerned about mm ownership changes > between tasks in the same cgroup. So I think that's a valid and useful > optimization. > Hmm. probably.. I'll do that check. Let me post v5 with these changes -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL