On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Glauber Costa<glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:We aim to control the amount of kernel memory pinned at any
time by tcp sockets. To lay the foundations for this work,
this patch adds a pointer to the kmem_cgroup to the socket
structure.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa<glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
CC: David S. Miller<davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
CC: Hiroyouki Kamezawa<kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
CC: Eric W. Biederman<ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
include/linux/kmem_cgroup.h | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/net/sock.h | 2 ++
net/core/sock.c | 5 ++---
3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/kmem_cgroup.h b/include/linux/kmem_cgroup.h
index 0e4a74b..77076d8 100644
--- a/include/linux/kmem_cgroup.h
+++ b/include/linux/kmem_cgroup.h
@@ -49,5 +49,34 @@ static inline struct kmem_cgroup *kcg_from_task(struct task_struct *tsk)
return NULL;
}
#endif /* CONFIG_CGROUP_KMEM */
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_INET
+#include<net/sock.h>
+static inline void sock_update_kmem_cgrp(struct sock *sk)
+{
+#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_KMEM
+ sk->sk_cgrp = kcg_from_task(current);
BUG_ON(sk->sk_cgrp) ? Or else release the old cgroup if necessary.
I don't particularly like it. I think that ifdef'ing fields@@ -339,6 +340,7 @@ struct sock {
#endif
__u32 sk_mark;
u32 sk_classid;
+ struct kmem_cgroup *sk_cgrp;
Should this be protected by a #ifdef?