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=-7.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 E648CC433E6 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 02:28:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 951DA20707 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 02:28:59 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 951DA20707 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id E59196B0055; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 22:28:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id E09C46B005A; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 22:28:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id D20486B005C; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 22:28:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0172.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.172]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B91A46B0055 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 22:28:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin01.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76BDA1F1B for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 02:28:58 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77212909956.01.girls86_120adb127094 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B8C51004B363 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 02:28:58 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: girls86_120adb127094 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2540 Received: from out30-45.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-45.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.45]) by imf36.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 02:28:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Alimail-AntiSpam:AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R181e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e01e01353;MF=alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=10;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0U7ULzwe_1598927332; Received: from IT-FVFX43SYHV2H.local(mailfrom:alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0U7ULzwe_1598927332) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Tue, 01 Sep 2020 10:28:53 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] mm: fixes to past from future testing To: Hugh Dickins , Andrew Morton Cc: Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , Mike Kravetz , Shakeel Butt , Matthew Wilcox , Qian Cai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org References: From: Alex Shi Message-ID: <9fa34576-92ec-37db-0b9c-b29d28aa8775@linux.alibaba.com> Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2020 10:28:51 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gbk X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4B8C51004B363 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 100.00] X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: =D4=DA 2020/8/31 =C9=CF=CE=E74:57, Hugh Dickins =D0=B4=B5=C0: > Here's a set of independent fixes against 5.9-rc2: prompted by > testing Alex Shi's "warning on !memcg" and lru_lock series, but > I think fit for 5.9 - though maybe only the first for stable. >=20 > [PATCH 1/5] ksm: reinstate memcg charge on copied pages > [PATCH 2/5] mm: migration of hugetlbfs page skip memcg > [PATCH 3/5] shmem: shmem_writepage() split unlikely i915 THP > [PATCH 4/5] mm: fix check_move_unevictable_pages() on THP > [PATCH 5/5] mlock: fix unevictable_pgs event counts on THP Hi Hugh, Thanks a lot for reporting and fix! All fixed looks fine for me. BTW, I assume you already rebased lru_lock patchset on this. So I don't=20 need to redo rebase again, do I? :) Thanks Alex >=20 > mm/ksm.c | 4 ++++ > mm/migrate.c | 3 ++- > mm/mlock.c | 24 +++++++++++++++--------- > mm/shmem.c | 10 +++++++++- > mm/swap.c | 6 +++--- > mm/vmscan.c | 10 ++++++++-- > 6 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) >=20