Re: [PATCH 0/4] Memory controller soft limit patches (v3)

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:35:19 +0530
Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > Then, not-sorted RB-tree can be there.
> > 
> > BTW,
> >    time_after(jiffies, 0)
> > is buggy (see definition). If you want make this true always,
> >    time_after(jiffies, jiffies +1)
> >
> 
> HZ/4 is 250/4 jiffies in the worst case (62). We have
> time_after(jiffies, next_update_interval) and next_update_interval is
> set to last_tree_update + 62. Not sure if I got what you are pointing
> to.
> 
+	unsigned long next_update = 0;
+	unsigned long flags;
+
+	if (!css_tryget(&mem->css))
+		return;
+	prev_usage_in_excess = mem->usage_in_excess;
+	new_usage_in_excess = res_counter_soft_limit_excess(&mem->res);
+
+	if (time_check)
+		next_update = mem->last_tree_update +
+				MEM_CGROUP_TREE_UPDATE_INTERVAL;
+	if (new_usage_in_excess && time_after(jiffies, next_update)) {
+		if (prev_usage_in_excess)
+			mem_cgroup_remove_exceeded(mem);
+		mem_cgroup_insert_exceeded(mem);
+		updated_tree = true;
+	} else if (prev_usage_in_excess && !new_usage_in_excess) {
+		mem_cgroup_remove_exceeded(mem);
+		updated_tree = true;
+	}

My point is what happens if time_check==false.
time_afrter(jiffies, 0) is buggy.

Thanks,
-Kame

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