On (06/30/15 15:46), David Rientjes wrote:
> > > There are essential elements to an oom context that are passed around to
> > > multiple functions.
> > > 
> > > Organize these elements into a new struct, struct oom_context, that
> > > specifies the context for an oom condition.
> > > 
> > 
> > s/oom_context/oom_control/ ?
> > 
> 
> I think it would be confused with the existing memory.oom_control for 
> memcg.
> 

Hello David,

Sorry, I meant that in commit message you say

:Organize these elements into a new struct, struct oom_context, that
:specifies the context for an oom condition.

but define and use `struct oom_control' (not `struct oom_context')

[..]

+       const gfp_t gfp_mask = GFP_KERNEL;
+       struct oom_control oc = {
+               .zonelist = node_zonelist(first_memory_node, gfp_mask),
+               .nodemask = NULL,
+               .gfp_mask = gfp_mask,
+               .order = 0,
+               .force_kill = true,
+       };
+

[..]

+struct oom_control {
+       struct zonelist *zonelist;
+       nodemask_t      *nodemask;
+       gfp_t           gfp_mask;
+       int             order;
+       bool            force_kill;
+};

[..]

etc.

        -ss
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to