* [PATCH v3] mm: memcontrol: reword obsolete comment of mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom()
@ 2020-09-30 9:53 Miaohe Lin
2020-09-30 10:48 ` Michal Hocko
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Miaohe Lin @ 2020-09-30 9:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: akpm, hannes, mhocko, vdavydov.dev
Cc: cgroups, linux-mm, linux-kernel, linmiaohe
Since commit 79dfdaccd1d5 ("memcg: make oom_lock 0 and 1 based rather than
counter"), the mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom() is added and the comment of
the mem_cgroup_oom_unlock() is moved here. But this comment make no sense
here because mem_cgroup_oom_lock() does not operate on under_oom field. So
we reword the comment as this would be helpful.
[Thanks Michal Hocko for rewording this comment.]
Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 6877c765b8d0..4f0c14cb8690 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -1817,8 +1817,8 @@ static void mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
struct mem_cgroup *iter;
/*
- * When a new child is created while the hierarchy is under oom,
- * mem_cgroup_oom_lock() may not be called. Watch for underflow.
+ * Be careful about under_oom underflows becase a child memcg
+ * could have been added after mem_cgroup_mark_under_oom.
*/
spin_lock(&memcg_oom_lock);
for_each_mem_cgroup_tree(iter, memcg)
--
2.19.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] mm: memcontrol: reword obsolete comment of mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom()
2020-09-30 9:53 [PATCH v3] mm: memcontrol: reword obsolete comment of mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom() Miaohe Lin
@ 2020-09-30 10:48 ` Michal Hocko
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Michal Hocko @ 2020-09-30 10:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Miaohe Lin; +Cc: akpm, hannes, vdavydov.dev, cgroups, linux-mm, linux-kernel
On Wed 30-09-20 05:53:36, Miaohe Lin wrote:
> Since commit 79dfdaccd1d5 ("memcg: make oom_lock 0 and 1 based rather than
> counter"), the mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom() is added and the comment of
> the mem_cgroup_oom_unlock() is moved here. But this comment make no sense
> here because mem_cgroup_oom_lock() does not operate on under_oom field. So
> we reword the comment as this would be helpful.
> [Thanks Michal Hocko for rewording this comment.]
>
> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
> Cc: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Thanks!
> ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 6877c765b8d0..4f0c14cb8690 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -1817,8 +1817,8 @@ static void mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> struct mem_cgroup *iter;
>
> /*
> - * When a new child is created while the hierarchy is under oom,
> - * mem_cgroup_oom_lock() may not be called. Watch for underflow.
> + * Be careful about under_oom underflows becase a child memcg
> + * could have been added after mem_cgroup_mark_under_oom.
> */
> spin_lock(&memcg_oom_lock);
> for_each_mem_cgroup_tree(iter, memcg)
> --
> 2.19.1
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-09-30 10:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-09-30 9:53 [PATCH v3] mm: memcontrol: reword obsolete comment of mem_cgroup_unmark_under_oom() Miaohe Lin
2020-09-30 10:48 ` Michal Hocko
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).