Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] memcg: cleanup all typo in memory cgroup

[Kamezawa Hiroyuki]

(2012/06/25 17:45), Wanpeng Li wrote:
> From: Wanpeng Li <liwp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <liwp.linux@xxxxxxxxx>

my thunderbird's spell checker founds some more ;)

> ---
>   mm/memcontrol.c |   21 ++++++++++-----------
>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 4520b57..d474bf6 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -115,8 +115,8 @@ static const char * const mem_cgroup_events_names[] = {
>   
>   /*
>    * Per memcg event counter is incremented at every pagein/pageout. With THP,
> - * it will be incremated by the number of pages. This counter is used for
> - * for trigger some periodic events. This is straightforward and better
> + * it will be incremented by the number of pages. This counter is used to
> + * trigger some periodic events. This is straightforward and better
>    * than using jiffies etc. to handle periodic memcg event.
>    */
>   enum mem_cgroup_events_target {
> @@ -667,7 +667,7 @@ mem_cgroup_largest_soft_limit_node(struct mem_cgroup_tree_per_zone *mctz)
>    * Both of vmstat[] and percpu_counter has threshold and do periodic
>    * synchronization to implement "quick" read. There are trade-off between
>    * reading cost and precision of value. Then, we may have a chance to implement
> - * a periodic synchronizion of counter in memcg's counter.
> + * a periodic synchronization of counter in memcg's counter.
>    *
>    * But this _read() function is used for user interface now. The user accounts
>    * memory usage by memory cgroup and he _always_ requires exact value because
> @@ -677,7 +677,7 @@ mem_cgroup_largest_soft_limit_node(struct mem_cgroup_tree_per_zone *mctz)
>    *
>    * If there are kernel internal actions which can make use of some not-exact
>    * value, and reading all cpu value can be performance bottleneck in some
> - * common workload, threashold and synchonization as vmstat[] should be
> + * common workload, threshold and synchonization as vmstat[] should be

synchronization

>    * implemented.
>    */
>   static long mem_cgroup_read_stat(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> @@ -1304,7 +1304,7 @@ static void mem_cgroup_end_move(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
>    *
>    * mem_cgroup_under_move() - checking a cgroup is mc.from or mc.to or
>    *			  under hierarchy of moving cgroups. This is for
> - *			  waiting at hith-memory prressure caused by "move".
> + *			  waiting at hit-memory pressure caused by "move".
>    */
>   
>   static bool mem_cgroup_stolen(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> @@ -1597,7 +1597,7 @@ int mem_cgroup_select_victim_node(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
>   /*
>    * Check all nodes whether it contains reclaimable pages or not.
>    * For quick scan, we make use of scan_nodes. This will allow us to skip
> - * unused nodes. But scan_nodes is lazily updated and may not cotain
> + * unused nodes. But scan_nodes is lazily updated and may not contain
>    * enough new information. We need to do double check.
>    */
>   static bool mem_cgroup_reclaimable(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, bool noswap)
> @@ -2211,7 +2211,6 @@ static int mem_cgroup_do_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
>   	if (mem_cgroup_wait_acct_move(mem_over_limit))
>   		return CHARGE_RETRY;
>   
> -	/* If we don't need to call oom-killer at el, return immediately */
>   	if (!oom_check)
>   		return CHARGE_NOMEM;
>   	/* check OOM */
> @@ -2289,7 +2288,7 @@ again:
>   		 * In that case, "memcg" can point to root or p can be NULL with
>   		 * race with swapoff. Then, we have small risk of mis-accouning.
accounting 

Could you update ?

Thanks,
-Kame

(*) In my experience, too rapid update doesn't work well, maintainers cannot review it.

--
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/