From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx108.postini.com [74.125.245.108]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 551C46B004A for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 18:19:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from /spool/local by e28smtp01.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sat, 14 Apr 2012 03:49:24 +0530 Received: from d28av04.in.ibm.com (d28av04.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.66]) by d28relay05.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id q3DMJMJO1908940 for ; Sat, 14 Apr 2012 03:49:22 +0530 Received: from d28av04.in.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d28av04.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id q3E3nARY015936 for ; Sat, 14 Apr 2012 13:49:10 +1000 From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/7] memcg remove pre_destroy In-Reply-To: <20120413085014.GA9205@tiehlicka.suse.cz> References: <4F86B9BE.8000105@jp.fujitsu.com> <20120412160642.GA13069@google.com> <877gxksrq1.fsf@skywalker.in.ibm.com> <4F876C70.7060600@jp.fujitsu.com> <20120413085014.GA9205@tiehlicka.suse.cz>User-Agent: Notmuch/0.11.1+346~g13d19c3 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 03:49:15 +0530 Message-ID: <87vcl3gtr0.fsf@skywalker.in.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: Tejun Heo , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "cgroups@vger.kernel.org" , Johannes Weiner , Glauber Costa , Hugh Dickins , Andrew Morton Michal Hocko writes: > On Fri 13-04-12 08:59:44, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: >> (2012/04/13 3:57), Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: >> >> > Tejun Heo writes: >> > >> >> Hello, KAMEZAWA. >> >> >> >> Thanks a lot for doing this. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 08:17:18PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: >> >>> In recent discussion, Tejun Heo, cgroup maintainer, has a plan to remove >> >>> ->pre_destroy(). And now, in cgroup tree, pre_destroy() failure cause WARNING. >> >> >> >> Just to clarify, I'm not intending to ->pre_destroy() per-se but the >> >> retry behavior of it, so ->pre_destroy() will be converted to return >> >> void and called once on rmdir and rmdir will proceed no matter what. >> >> Also, with the deprecated behavior flag set, pre_destroy() doesn't >> >> trigger the warning message. >> >> >> >> Other than that, if memcg people are fine with the change, I'll be >> >> happy to route the changes through cgroup/for-3.5 and stack rmdir >> >> simplification patches on top. >> >> >> > >> > Any suggestion on how to take HugeTLB memcg extension patches [1] >> > upstream. Current patch series I have is on top of cgroup/for-3.5 >> > because I need cgroup_add_files equivalent and cgroup/for-3.5 have >> > changes around that. So if these memcg patches can also go on top of >> > cgroup/for-3.5 then I can continue to work on top of cgroup/for-3.5 ? > > I would suggest working on top of memcg-devel tree or on top linux-next. > Just pull the required patch-es from cgroup/for-3.5 tree before your > work (I can include that into memcg-devel tree for you if you want). I am expecting to have no conflicts with pending memcg changes. But I do have conflicts with cgroup/for-3.5. That is the reason I decided to rebase on top of cgroup/for-3.5. > > Do you think this is a 3.5 material? I would rather wait some more. I > didn't have time to look over it yet and there are still some unresolved > issues so it sounds like too early for merging. I would really like to get it merged for 3.5. I am ready to post V6 that address all review feedback from V5 post. > >> > Can HugeTLB memcg extension patches also go via this tree ? It >> > should actually got via -mm. But then how do we take care of these >> > dependencies ? > > You are not changing anything generic from cgroup so definitely go via > Andrew. > agreed. >> I'm not in hurry. To be honest, I cannot update patches until the next Wednesday. >> So, If changes of cgroup tree you required are included in linux-next. Please post >> your updated ones. I thought your latest version was near to be merged.... >> >> How do you think, Michal ? >> Please post (and ask Andrew to pull it.) I'll review when I can. > > I would wait with pulling the patch after the review. > agreed. So I will do a v6 post and if we all agree with the changes it can be pulled via -mm ? >> I know yours and mine has some conflicts. I think my this series will >> be onto your series. To do that, I hope your series are merged to >> linux-next, 1st. >> -aneesh -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org