Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the tip tree

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>]

* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in 
> mm/migrate.c between the tip tree and commit "mm: memcg: fix 
> compaction/migration failing due to memcg limits" from the 
> akpm tree.
> 
> The commit 4783af477d3d ("mm: Migrate misplaced page") was 
> removed (among several others) from the tip tree since 
> yesterday (and thus linux-next) so the above akpm tree patch 
> no longer applies.
> 
> I have dropped this patch form the akpm tree (and the following patches
> as well:
> mm-memcg-fix-compaction-migration-failing-due-to-memcg-limits-checkpatch-fixes
> mm: memcg: push down PageSwapCache check into uncharge entry functions
> mm: memcg: only check for PageSwapCache when uncharging anon
> mm: memcg: remove unneeded shmem charge type
> mm: memcg: remove needless !mm fixup to init_mm when charging
> )
> 
> Hopefully this doesn't cause other problems.  I guess that 
> they will need rebasing depending on what gets merged via the 
> tip tree.

Andrew, sorry about this last minute fallout: I felt that 
sched/numa was still not fully cooked and did not want to hold 
up the rest of the scheduler tree on that - nor did I want to 
send an uncooked tree to Linus.

PeterZ posted another series of sched/numa patches two days ago 
- once that is ready (probably after the merge window) it will 
all reappear again, in a slightly different form. I could stick 
the mm/ bits into a separate tree to make it easier for you.

Cross-discipline patches are hard - the other option would be to 
let Linux NUMA scheduling continue to suck.

Thanks,

	Ingo