On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Vladimir Davydov
vdavy...@parallels.com wrote:
On 12/18/2013 09:41 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Wed 18-12-13 17:16:55, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
The memcg_params::memcg_caches array can be updated concurrently from
memcg_update_cache_size() and
On Thu 19-12-13 12:00:58, Glauber Costa wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Vladimir Davydov
vdavy...@parallels.com wrote:
On 12/18/2013 09:41 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Wed 18-12-13 17:16:55, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
The memcg_params::memcg_caches array can be updated concurrently
On 12/19/2013 01:12 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Thu 19-12-13 12:00:58, Glauber Costa wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Vladimir Davydov
vdavy...@parallels.com wrote:
On 12/18/2013 09:41 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Wed 18-12-13 17:16:55, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
The
Hi, Christoph
We have a problem with memcg-vs-slab interactions. Currently we set the
pointer to a new kmem_cache in its parent's memcg_caches array inside
memcg_create_kmem_cache() (mm/memcontrol.c):
memcg_create_kmem_cache():
new_cachep = cache_from_memcg_idx(cachep, idx);
if
The memcg_params::memcg_caches array can be updated concurrently from
memcg_update_cache_size() and memcg_create_kmem_cache(). Although both
of these functions take the slab_mutex during their operation, the
latter checks if memcg's cache has already been allocated w/o taking the
mutex. This can
On Wed 18-12-13 17:16:55, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
The memcg_params::memcg_caches array can be updated concurrently from
memcg_update_cache_size() and memcg_create_kmem_cache(). Although both
of these functions take the slab_mutex during their operation, the
latter checks if memcg's cache has
On 12/18/2013 09:41 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Wed 18-12-13 17:16:55, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
The memcg_params::memcg_caches array can be updated concurrently from
memcg_update_cache_size() and memcg_create_kmem_cache(). Although both
of these functions take the slab_mutex during their
