From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756103AbYDAGsY (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Apr 2008 02:48:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751890AbYDAGsP (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Apr 2008 02:48:15 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.33.17]:9007 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751350AbYDAGsO (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Apr 2008 02:48:14 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: content-disposition:references; b=OnW21EJzj9gGLyJ/IkAMw+tcJCP16zRww16k2f2IG8EQao6h8TDC0Rstc5keT2IpS 0joGAOh1G3pFjUQ7hvbiQ== Message-ID: <6599ad830803312348u3ee4d815i2e24c130978f8e04@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 23:48:00 -0700 From: "Paul Menage" To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [RFC][-mm] Add an owner to the mm_struct (v3) Cc: "Pavel Emelianov" , "Hugh Dickins" , "Sudhir Kumar" , "YAMAMOTO Takashi" , lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, taka@valinux.co.jp, linux-mm@kvack.org, "David Rientjes" , "Andrew Morton" , "KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" In-Reply-To: <47F1D4F3.3040207@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080401054324.829.4517.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <6599ad830803312316m17f9e6f1mf7f068c0314a789e@mail.gmail.com> <47F1D4F3.3040207@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11:23 PM, Balbir Singh wrote: > > Here we'll want to call vm_cgroup_update_mm_owner(), to adjust the > > accounting. (Or if in future we end up with more than a couple of > > subsystems that want notification at this time, we'll want to call > > cgroup_update_mm_owner() and have it call any interested subsystems. > > > > I don't think we need to adjust accounting, since only mm->owner is changing and > not the cgroup to which the task/mm belongs. Do we really need to notify? I > don't want to do any notifications under task_lock(). It's possible but unlikely that the new owner is in a different cgroup. Paul