From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx134.postini.com [74.125.245.134]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 609006B0037 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 03:18:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <51626F50.6090204@parallels.com> Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 11:18:40 +0400 From: Glauber Costa MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] memcg: make memcg's life cycle the same as cgroup References: <515BF233.6070308@huawei.com> <516131D7.8030004@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <516131D7.8030004@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Li Zefan Cc: Michal Hocko , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML , Cgroups , Tejun Heo , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Johannes Weiner On 04/07/2013 12:44 PM, Li Zefan wrote: > Hi, > > I'm rebasing this patchset against latest linux-next, and it conflicts with > "[PATCH v2] memcg: debugging facility to access dangling memcgs." slightly. > > That is a debugging patch and will never be pushed into mainline, so should I > still base this patchset on that debugging patch? > It will conflict as well with my shrinking patches: I will still keep the memcgs in the dangling list, but that will have nothing to do with debugging. So I will split that patch in a list management part, which will be used, and a debugging part (with the file + the debugging information). I will be happy to rebase it ontop of your series. > Also that patch needs update (and can be simplified) after this patchset: > - move memcg_dangling_add() to mem_cgroup_css_offline() > - remove memcg->memcg_name, and use cgroup_path() in mem_cgroup_dangling_read()? > Don't worry about it. If this is just this one patch conflicting, I would avise Andrew to remove it, and I will provide another (maybe two, already splitted up) version. -- 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