From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Claude Code Review Bot To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com Subject: Claude review: cgroup/dmem: Add queries for protection values Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2026 07:10:15 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20260313-dmemcg-aggressive-protect-v6-1-7c71cc1492db@gmx.de> References: <20260313-dmemcg-aggressive-protect-v6-0-7c71cc1492db@gmx.de> <20260313-dmemcg-aggressive-protect-v6-1-7c71cc1492db@gmx.de> X-Mailer: Claude Code Patch Reviewer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Patch Review This patch adds `dmem_cgroup_below_min()` and `dmem_cgroup_below_low()` as = counterparts to memcg's `mem_cgroup_below_{min,low}`. The implementation looks correct. Both functions walk up to find the root w= hen `root` is NULL, call `dmem_cgroup_calculate_protection()` to refresh ef= fective values, and then compare usage against `emin`/`elow`. **Minor nit**: The comment says "the memcg pendant" =E2=80=94 the English w= ord should be "pendant" =E2=86=92 "**pendant**" is actually an ornament; th= e correct word is "**counterpart**" or "**pendant**" in some European langu= ages. This appears twice (both functions have the same comment). Suggest s/= pendant/counterpart/. The `<=3D` comparison is consistent with `dmem_cgroup_state_evict_valuable(= )` which uses `used <=3D min` to mean "protected". No issues here. --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer