Re: [PATCH v6 06/29] memcg: kmem controller infrastructure

[Christoph Lameter]

On Thu, 1 Nov 2012, Glauber Costa wrote:

> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM
> +static inline bool memcg_kmem_enabled(void)
> +{
> +	return true;
> +}
> +

Maybe it would be better to do this in the same way that NUMA_BUILD was
done in kernel.h?


> +static __always_inline bool
> +memcg_kmem_newpage_charge(gfp_t gfp, struct mem_cgroup **memcg, int order)
> +{
> +	if (!memcg_kmem_enabled())
> +		return true;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * __GFP_NOFAIL allocations will move on even if charging is not
> +	 * possible. Therefore we don't even try, and have this allocation
> +	 * unaccounted. We could in theory charge it with
> +	 * res_counter_charge_nofail, but we hope those allocations are rare,
> +	 * and won't be worth the trouble.
> +	 */
> +	if (!(gfp & __GFP_KMEMCG) || (gfp & __GFP_NOFAIL))
> +		return true;


> +	if (in_interrupt() || (!current->mm) || (current->flags & PF_KTHREAD))
> +		return true;

This type of check is repeatedly occurring in various subsystems. Could we
get a function (maybe inline) to do this check?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/