On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 05:49:59PM +0300, Kirill Tkhai wrote: > >> @@ -589,13 +647,7 @@ static unsigned long shrink_slab(gfp_t gfp_mask, int > >> nid, > >> .memcg = memcg, > >> }; > >> > >> - /* > >> - * If kernel memory accounting is disabled, we ignore > >> - * SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE flag and call all shrinkers > >> - * passing NULL for memcg. > >> - */ > >> - if (memcg_kmem_enabled() && > >> - !!memcg != !!(shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE)) > >> + if (!!memcg != !!(shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE)) > >> continue; > > > > I want this check gone. It's easy to achieve, actually - just remove the > > following lines from shrink_node() > > > > if (global_reclaim(sc)) > > shrink_slab(sc->gfp_mask, pgdat->node_id, NULL, > > sc->priority); > > This check is not related to the patchset.
Yes, it is. This patch modifies shrink_slab which is used only by shrink_node. Simplifying shrink_node along the way looks right to me. > Let's don't mix everything in the single series of patches, because > after your last remarks it will grow at least up to 15 patches. Most of which are trivial so I don't see any problem here. > This patchset can't be responsible for everything. I don't understand why you balk at simplifying the code a bit while you are patching related functions anyway. > > >> > >> if (!(shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_NUMA_AWARE)) > >>
