Re: [PATCH] hugetlb/cgroup: Simplify pre_destroy callback

2012-07-19 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 19-07-12 16:56:18, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > Kamezawa Hiroyuki writes: > > > > > We test RES_USAGE before taking hugetlb_lock. What prevents some other > > thread from increasing RES_USAGE after that test? > > > > After walking the list we test RES_USAGE after dropping

Re: [PATCH] hugetlb/cgroup: Simplify pre_destroy callback

2012-07-19 Thread Aneesh Kumar K.V
Kamezawa Hiroyuki writes: > > We test RES_USAGE before taking hugetlb_lock. What prevents some other > thread from increasing RES_USAGE after that test? > > After walking the list we test RES_USAGE after dropping hugetlb_lock. > What prevents another thread from increment

Re: [PATCH] hugetlb/cgroup: Simplify pre_destroy callback

2012-07-19 Thread Kamezawa Hiroyuki
(2012/07/19 18:41), Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: Li Zefan writes: on 2012/7/19 10:55, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: Andrew Morton writes: On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:04:09 +0530 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" wrote: From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Since we cannot fail in hugetlb_cgroup_move_parent, we don't really nee

Re: [PATCH] hugetlb/cgroup: Simplify pre_destroy callback

2012-07-19 Thread Aneesh Kumar K.V
Li Zefan writes: > on 2012/7/19 10:55, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > >> Andrew Morton writes: >> >>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:04:09 +0530 >>> "Aneesh Kumar K.V" wrote: >>> From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Since we cannot fail in hugetlb_cgroup_move_parent, we don't really need to check

Re: [PATCH] hugetlb/cgroup: Simplify pre_destroy callback

2012-07-19 Thread Li Zefan
on 2012/7/19 10:55, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > Andrew Morton writes: > >> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:04:09 +0530 >> "Aneesh Kumar K.V" wrote: >> >>> From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" >>> >>> Since we cannot fail in hugetlb_cgroup_move_parent, we don't really >>> need to check whether cgroup have any change

Re: [PATCH] hugetlb/cgroup: Simplify pre_destroy callback

2012-07-18 Thread Aneesh Kumar K.V
Andrew Morton writes: > On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:04:09 +0530 > "Aneesh Kumar K.V" wrote: > >> From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" >> >> Since we cannot fail in hugetlb_cgroup_move_parent, we don't really >> need to check whether cgroup have any change left after that. Also skip >> those hstates for which w

Re: [PATCH] hugetlb/cgroup: Simplify pre_destroy callback

2012-07-18 Thread Andrew Morton
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:04:09 +0530 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" wrote: > From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" > > Since we cannot fail in hugetlb_cgroup_move_parent, we don't really > need to check whether cgroup have any change left after that. Also skip > those hstates for which we don't have any charge in this cg

Re: [PATCH] hugetlb/cgroup: Simplify pre_destroy callback

2012-07-18 Thread Wanpeng Li
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:04:09AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: >From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" > >Since we cannot fail in hugetlb_cgroup_move_parent, we don't really >need to check whether cgroup have any change left after that. Also skip >those hstates for which we don't have any charge in this cgro