From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the tip tree Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 21:03:51 +0200 Message-ID: <20120725190351.GA4143@gmail.com> References: <20120725140827.4332a5448e4d8d200164ea2e@canb.auug.org.au> <20120725071044.GA27535@gmail.com> <20120725073503.GB1112@cmpxchg.org> <20120725115713.e56239b5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com ([209.85.212.178]:61673 "EHLO mail-wi0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751026Ab2GYTED (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:04:03 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120725115713.e56239b5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Johannes Weiner , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lee Schermerhorn , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra * Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 09:35:03 +0200 > Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > As this is unlikely to reappear in this merge window, the conflict > > resolution is quite simple. All that's needed is remove the 3 hunks > > from my patch that converted a user in Peter's patch to a new API. I > > can resend the series if needed, but it's probably easier to just > > remove the hunks against mm/migrate.c::migrate_misplaced_page(): > > > > @@ -1519,10 +1512,9 @@ migrate_misplaced_page(struct page *page, struct mm_struct *mm, int node) > > { > > struct page *oldpage = page, *newpage; > > struct address_space *mapping = page_mapping(page); > > - struct mem_cgroup *mcg; > > + struct mem_cgroup *memcg; > > unsigned int gfp; > > int rc = 0; > > - int charge = -ENOMEM; > > > > VM_BUG_ON(!PageLocked(page)); > > VM_BUG_ON(page_mapcount(page)); > > @@ -1556,12 +1548,7 @@ migrate_misplaced_page(struct page *page, struct mm_struct *mm, int node) > > if (!trylock_page(newpage)) > > BUG(); /* new page should be unlocked!!! */ > > > > - // XXX hnaz, is this right? > > - charge = mem_cgroup_prepare_migration(page, newpage, &mcg, gfp); > > - if (charge == -ENOMEM) { > > - rc = charge; > > - goto out; > > - } > > + mem_cgroup_prepare_migration(page, newpage, &memcg); > > > > newpage->index = page->index; > > newpage->mapping = page->mapping; > > @@ -1581,11 +1568,9 @@ migrate_misplaced_page(struct page *page, struct mm_struct *mm, int node) > > page = newpage; > > } > > > > + mem_cgroup_end_migration(memcg, oldpage, newpage, !rc); > > out: > > - if (!charge) > > - mem_cgroup_end_migration(mcg, oldpage, newpage, !rc); > > - > > - if (oldpage != page) > > + if (oldpage != page) > > put_page(oldpage); > > > > if (rc) { > > Yes, that worked out OK. > > This means that if the above code reappears in linux-next or > mainline, the current copy of > mm-memcg-fix-compaction-migration-failing-due-to-memcg-limits.patch > will no longer update it, and I probably won't notice that > omission. Did you plan to send Johannes's memcg bits to Linus in this merge window? If yes then I'll delay pushing out anything that might interfere. Thanks, Ingo