lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] memcg: res_counter hierarchy
----- Original Message -----

>> @@ -135,13 +138,118 @@ ssize_t res_counter_write(struct res_cou
>> if (*end != '\0')
>> goto out_free;
>> }
>> - spin_lock_irqsave(&counter->lock, flags);
>> - val = res_counter_member(counter, member);
>> - *val = tmp;
>> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&counter->lock, flags);
>> - ret = nbytes;
>> + if (member != RES_LIMIT || !callback) {
>
>is there any reason to check member != RES_LIMIT here,
>rather than in callers?

Hmm...ok. This is messy. I'll rearrange this.


>
>> +/*
>> + * Move resource to its parent.
>> + * child->limit -= val.
>> + * parent->usage -= val.
>> + * parent->limit -= val.
>
>s/limit/for_children/
>
>> + */
>> +
>> +int res_counter_repay_resource(struct res_counter *child,
>> + struct res_counter *parent,
>> + unsigned long long val,
>> + res_shrink_callback_t callback, int retry)
>
>can you reduce gratuitous differences between
>res_counter_borrow_resource and res_counter_repay_resource?
>eg. 'success' vs 'done', how to decrement 'retry'.
>

Ah, sorry. I'll rewrite.
I'll make next version's quality better.

Thanks,
-Kame





\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-02 11:55    [W:0.115 / U:0.280 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site