From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, prarit@redhat.com,
andi.kleen@intel.com, m-kosaki@ceres.dti.ne.jp,
dmiyakawa@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu
Subject: Re: Scalability fixes -- 2.6.31 candidate?
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:13:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090820161325.562b255e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090820190941.GA29572@balbir.in.ibm.com>
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:39:42 +0530
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi, Andrew,
>
> I've been wondering if the scalability fixes for root overhead in
> memory cgroup is a candidate for 2.6.31?
These?
memcg-improve-resource-counter-scalability.patch
memcg-improve-resource-counter-scalability-checkpatch-fixes.patch
memcg-improve-resource-counter-scalability-v5.patch
> They don't change
> functionality but help immensely using existing accounting features.
>
> Opening up the email for more debate and discussion and thoughts.
>
They don't apply terribly well to mainline:
patching file mm/memcontrol.c
Hunk #1 FAILED at 70.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 479.
Hunk #3 FAILED at 1295.
Hunk #4 FAILED at 1359.
Hunk #5 FAILED at 1432.
Hunk #6 FAILED at 1514.
Hunk #7 FAILED at 1534.
Hunk #8 FAILED at 1605.
Hunk #9 FAILED at 1798.
Hunk #10 FAILED at 1826.
Hunk #11 FAILED at 1883.
Hunk #12 FAILED at 1981.
Hunk #13 succeeded at 2091 (offset -405 lines).
12 out of 13 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file mm/memcontrol.c.rej
Failed to apply memcg-improve-resource-counter-scalability
so maybe you're referring to these:
memcg-remove-the-overhead-associated-with-the-root-cgroup.patch
memcg-remove-the-overhead-associated-with-the-root-cgroup-fix.patch
memcg-remove-the-overhead-associated-with-the-root-cgroup-fix-2.patch
as well.
But then memcg-improve-resource-counter-scalability.patch still doesn't
apply. Maybe memcg-improve-resource-counter-scalability.patch depends
on memory-controller-soft-limit-*.patch too. I stopped looking.
It's a lot of material and a lot of churn. I'd be more inclined to
proceed with a 2.6.32 merge and then perhaps you can see if you can
come up with a minimal patchset for -stable, see if the -stable
maintainers can be talked into merging it.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-21 15:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-20 19:09 Balbir Singh
2009-08-20 23:13 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-08-21 5:28 ` Balbir Singh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090820161325.562b255e.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi.kleen@intel.com \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dmiyakawa@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=m-kosaki@ceres.dti.ne.jp \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox