From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B27746B0071 for ; Thu, 25 Mar 2010 08:56:18 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4BAB5D7F.5010401@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:56:31 +0800 From: Miao Xie Reply-To: miaox@cn.fujitsu.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 4/4] cpuset,mm: update task's mems_allowed lazily References: <4B94CD2D.8070401@cn.fujitsu.com> <4B95F802.9020308@cn.fujitsu.com> <20100311081548.GJ5812@laptop> <4B98C6DE.3060602@cn.fujitsu.com> <20100311110317.GL5812@laptop> <4BAB39B9.7080600@cn.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <4BAB39B9.7080600@cn.fujitsu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Nick Piggin , David Rientjes , Lee Schermerhorn , Paul Menage , Andrew Morton Cc: Linux-Kernel , Linux-MM List-ID: on 2010-3-25 18:23, Miao Xie wrote: > on 2010-3-11 19:03, Nick Piggin wrote: >> Well... I do think seqlocks would be a bit simpler because they don't >> require this checking and synchronizing of this patch. > > Hi, Nick Piggin > > I have made a new patch which uses seqlock to protect mems_allowed and mempolicy. > please review it. > > title: [PATCH -mmotm] cpuset,mm: use seqlock to protect task->mempolicy and mems_allowed > Sorry! Please ignore this patch, because I sent an old version. I'll send the new one later. Regards! Miao -- 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: email@kvack.org