From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Paul Menage" Subject: Re: [RFC][-mm] Add an owner to the mm_struct (v4) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 21:10:36 -0700 Message-ID: <6599ad830804022110h2090f3efg7c6173df8185679e@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080401124312.23664.64616.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <47F3D62E.4070808@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <6599ad830804021253y6bf3b37y9bf1167b63c32e70@mail.gmail.com> <47F4577E.5060905@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: <47F4577E.5060905@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com 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 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. Paul