On 06/20/2012 05:28 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Mon 18-06-12 14:27:59, Glauber Costa wrote:
From: Suleiman Souhlal <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Suleiman Souhlal <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <[email protected]>
I am not sure the patch is good to merge on its own without the rest.
One comment bellow.
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 18 +++++++++---------
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index ce15be4..00b9f1e 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -1998,19 +1998,19 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct memcg_stock_pcp,
memcg_stock);
static DEFINE_MUTEX(percpu_charge_mutex);
/*
- * Try to consume stocked charge on this cpu. If success, one page is consumed
- * from local stock and true is returned. If the stock is 0 or charges from a
- * cgroup which is not current target, returns false. This stock will be
- * refilled.
+ * Try to consume stocked charge on this cpu. If success, nr_pages pages are
+ * consumed from local stock and true is returned. If the stock is 0 or
+ * charges from a cgroup which is not current target, returns false.
+ * This stock will be refilled.
*/
-static bool consume_stock(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
+static bool consume_stock(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int nr_pages)
{
struct memcg_stock_pcp *stock;
bool ret = true;
I guess you want:
if (nr_pages > CHARGE_BATCH)
return false;
because you don't want to try to use stock for THP pages.
The code reads:
+ if (memcg == stock->cached && stock->nr_pages >= nr_pages)
+ stock->nr_pages -= nr_pages;
Isn't stock->nr_pages always <= CHARGE_BATCH by definition?
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
