From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764452AbcLTSCy (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:02:54 -0500 Received: from mail-it0-f66.google.com ([209.85.214.66]:35638 "EHLO mail-it0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1764371AbcLTSCs (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:02:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20161219225826.F8CB356F@viggo.jf.intel.com> <156a5b34-ad3b-d0aa-83c9-109b366c1bdf@linux.intel.com> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 10:02:46 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: _RlG0BUvvO_TvcaveZLW2JLBwr8 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] make global bitlock waitqueues per-node To: Dave Hansen Cc: Bob Peterson , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Steven Whitehouse , Andrew Lutomirski , Andreas Gruenbacher , Peter Zijlstra , Mel Gorman , linux-mm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I'll go back and try to see why the page flag contention patch didn't > get applied. Ahh, a combination of warring patches by Nick and PeterZ, and worry about the page flag bits. Damn. I had mentally marked this whole issue as "solved". But the fact that we know how to solve it doesn't mean it's done. Linus