From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94E09C33CA2 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 19:40:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CA112072E for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 19:40:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="kiA0tICF" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4CA112072E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux-foundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id C435D8E0005; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 14:40:58 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id BCC398E0001; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 14:40:58 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id ABAA48E0005; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 14:40:58 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0186.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.186]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 920FA8E0001 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 14:40:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin23.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 45C794850 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 19:40:58 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76359113796.23.wine89_7cd8cb8ed574f X-HE-Tag: wine89_7cd8cb8ed574f X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2467 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by imf46.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 19:40:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-73-231-172-41.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [73.231.172.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8FAD4206ED; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 19:40:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1578598857; bh=X0z3ZMQ6U89MxRIr+jDwpNoWO2V+ca4iynLOUUPipMQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=kiA0tICFKwEjBugnYHWXoeGrESRYnKeFMSHRoMBz8Q0B/WLQJRJQy0GhG4Ni0Po0D vU9S0/PYcvc1Z70rAgTNoXFUeRDL7p6UQsGcVcHZ6oFCvCy5z/SAF3g5/BWR6cXClH qegB1av8Zh/ZCYzV8nXcdiDvlLu1xLyBaBnFk6q8= Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 11:40:55 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Roman Gushchin Cc: , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , Shakeel Butt , Vladimir Davydov , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] mm: kmem: remove duplicate definitions of __memcg_kmem_(un)charge() Message-Id: <20200109114055.67bda2b70d92b07ef13e3047@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20200109172745.285585-2-guro@fb.com> References: <20200109172745.285585-1-guro@fb.com> <20200109172745.285585-2-guro@fb.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:27:39 -0800 Roman Gushchin wrote: > For some reason these inline functions are defined twice. Remove > the second identical copy. Don't think so - that wouldn't have compiled. > --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h > +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h > @@ -1438,15 +1438,6 @@ static inline void memcg_kmem_uncharge(struct page *page, int order) > { > } > > -static inline int __memcg_kmem_charge(struct page *page, gfp_t gfp, int order) > -{ > - return 0; > -} > - > -static inline void __memcg_kmem_uncharge(struct page *page, int order) > -{ > -} > - > #define for_each_memcg_cache_index(_idx) \ > for (; NULL; ) > Maybe you confused these with memcg_kmem_charge() and memcg_kmem_uncharge()?