On 06/25/2012 10:06 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:

Again, nits.

On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 06:15:23PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:

quoted

+#define mem_cgroup_kmem_on 1
+bool __mem_cgroup_new_kmem_page(gfp_t gfp, void *handle, int order);
+void __mem_cgroup_commit_kmem_page(struct page *page, void *handle, int order);
+void __mem_cgroup_free_kmem_page(struct page *page, int order);
+#define is_kmem_tracked_alloc (gfp & __GFP_KMEMCG)

Ugh... please do the following instead.

static inline bool is_kmem_tracked_alloc(gfp_t gfp)
{
	return gfp & __GFP_KMEMCG;
}

quoted

  #else
  static inline void sock_update_memcg(struct sock *sk)
  {

@@ -416,6 +423,43 @@ static inline void sock_update_memcg(struct sock *sk)
  static inline void sock_release_memcg(struct sock *sk)
  {
  }
+
+#define mem_cgroup_kmem_on 0
+#define __mem_cgroup_new_kmem_page(a, b, c) false
+#define __mem_cgroup_free_kmem_page(a,b )
+#define __mem_cgroup_commit_kmem_page(a, b, c)
+#define is_kmem_tracked_alloc (false)

I would prefer static inlines here too.  It's a bit more code in the
header but leads to less surprises (e.g. arg evals w/ side effects or
compiler warning about unused vars) and makes it easier to avoid
cosmetic errors.

Thanks.

Sure thing.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>