On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 02:16:47 -0400
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:

quoted text
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 09:25:38AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > 
> > BTW, why xbf_buf_create() use GFP_KERNEL even if it can be blocked ?
> > memory cgroup just limits pages for users, then, doesn't intend to
> > limit kernel pages.
> 
> You mean xfs_buf_allocate?  It doesn't in the end.  It goes through the
> xfs_kmem helper which clear __GFP_FS if we're currently inside a
> filesystem transaction (PF_FSTRANS is set) or a caller specificly
> requested it to be disabled even without that by passig the
> XBF_DONT_BLOCK flag.
> 
Ah, sorry. My question was wrong.

If xfs_buf_allocate() is not for pages on LRU but for kernel memory,
memory cgroup has no reason to charge against it because we can't reclaim
memory which is not on LRU.

Then, I wonder I may have to add following check 

	if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_RECLAIMABLE)) {
		/* ignore this. we just charge against reclaimable memory on LRU. */
		return 0;
	}

to mem_cgroup_charge_cache() which is a hook for accounting page-cache.


Thanks,
-Kame

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