From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (mail-wi0-f169.google.com [209.85.212.169]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95AFA6B0074 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 07:12:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: by wiga1 with SMTP id a1so167668937wig.0 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 04:12:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.suse.de (cantor2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r1si14648804wic.112.2015.06.18.04.12.32 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 18 Jun 2015 04:12:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 13:12:27 +0200 From: Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/51] memcg: add mem_cgroup_root_css Message-ID: <20150618111227.GA5858@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1432329245-5844-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <1432329245-5844-7-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <20150617145642.GI25056@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20150617182500.GI22637@mtj.duckdns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150617182500.GI22637@mtj.duckdns.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Tejun Heo Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jack@suse.cz, hch@infradead.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, vgoyal@redhat.com, lizefan@huawei.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, clm@fb.com, fengguang.wu@intel.com, david@fromorbit.com, gthelen@google.com, khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru On Wed 17-06-15 14:25:00, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hey, Michal. > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 04:56:42PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Fri 22-05-15 17:13:20, Tejun Heo wrote: > > > Add global mem_cgroup_root_css which points to the root memcg css. > > > > Is there any reason to using css rather than mem_cgroup other than the > > structure is not visible outside of memcontrol.c? Because I have a > > patchset which exports it. It is not merged yet so a move to mem_cgroup > > could be done later. I am just interested whether there is a stronger > > reason. > > It doesn't really matter either way but I think it makes a bit more > sense to use css as the common type when external code interacts with > cgroup controllers. e.g. cgroup writeback interacts with both memcg > and blkcg and in most cases it doesn't know or care about their > internal states. Most of what it wants is tracking them and doing > some common css operations (refcnting, printing and so on) on them. I see and yes, it makes some sense. I just think we can get rid of the accessor functions when the struct mem_cgroup is visible and the code can simply do &{page->}mem_cgroup->css. > > > This will be used by cgroup writeback support. If memcg is disabled, > > > it's defined as ERR_PTR(-EINVAL). > > > > Hmm. Why EINVAL? I can see only mm/backing-dev.c (in > > review-cgroup-writeback-switch-20150528 branch) which uses it and that > > shouldn't even try to compile if !CONFIG_MEMCG no? Otherwise we would > > simply blow up. > > Hmm... the code maybe has changed inbetween but there was something > which depended on the root css being defined when > !CONFIG_CGROUP_WRITEBACK or maybe it was on blkcg_root_css and memcg > side was added for consistency. I have tried to compile with !CONFIG_MEMCG and !CONFIG_CGROUP_WRITEBACK without mem_cgroup_root_css defined for this configuration and mm/backing-dev.c compiles just fine. So maybe we should get rid of it rather than have a potentially tricky code? > An ERR_PTR value is non-zero, which > is an invariant which is often depended upon, while guaranteeing oops > when deref'd. Yeah, but css_{get,put} and others consumers of the pointer are not checking for ERR_PTR. So I think this is really misleading. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- 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: email@kvack.org