Re: [PATCH 4/8] memcg, mm: move mem_cgroup_select_victim_node into vmscan

[Michal Hocko]

On Wed 08-07-15 19:01:59, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 02:27:48PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx>
> > 
> > We currently have only one caller of mem_cgroup_select_victim_node which
> > is sitting in mm/vmscan.c and which is already wrapped by CONFIG_MEMCG
> > ifdef. Now that we have struct mem_cgroup visible outside of
> > mm/memcontrol.c we can move the function and its dependencies there.
> > This even shrinks the code size by few bytes:
> > 
> >    text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
> >  478509   65806   26384  570699   8b54b mm/built-in.o.before
> >  478445   65806   26384  570635   8b50b mm/built-in.o.after
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx>
> 
> I dislike this patch, because I don't see any reason why logic specific
> to per memcg reclaim should live in the file representing the global
> reclaim path.

Well the idea was that mem_cgroup_select_victim_node is specific to
try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages. It is basically a split up of otherwise
large function for readability. Same applies to
mem_cgroup_may_update_nodemask. Having that code together makes some
sense to me.

On the other hand I do agree that at least
test_mem_cgroup_node_reclaimable is generally reusable and so it
shouldn't be in vmscan. I can move it back to memcontrol but that leaves
the generated code much worse.

Fair enough then, I will drop this patch.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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/