From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751460AbeEBM27 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 May 2018 08:28:59 -0400 Received: from gum.cmpxchg.org ([85.214.110.215]:48788 "EHLO gum.cmpxchg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751054AbeEBM25 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 May 2018 08:28:57 -0400 Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 08:30:40 -0400 From: Johannes Weiner To: Roman Gushchin Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com, Michal Hocko , Vladimir Davydov , Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: introduce memory.min Message-ID: <20180502123040.GA16060@cmpxchg.org> References: <20180423123610.27988-1-guro@fb.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180423123610.27988-1-guro@fb.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 01:36:10PM +0100, Roman Gushchin wrote: > @@ -59,6 +59,12 @@ enum memcg_memory_event { > MEMCG_NR_MEMORY_EVENTS, > }; > > +enum mem_cgroup_protection { > + MEMCG_PROT_NONE, > + MEMCG_PROT_LOW, > + MEMCG_PROT_HIGH, Ha, HIGH doesn't make much sense, but I went back and it's indeed what I suggested. Must have been a brainfart. This should be MEMCG_PROT_NONE, MEMCG_PROT_LOW, MEMCG_PROT_MIN right? To indicate which type of protection is applying. The rest of the patch looks good: Acked-by: Johannes Weiner