From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx195.postini.com [74.125.245.195]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5A4E66B0062 for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 14:30:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ie0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 10so3152099ied.14 for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:30:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1351241323.12171.43.camel@twins> References: <20121008150949.GA15130@redhat.com> <20121017040515.GA13505@redhat.com> <1351167554.23337.14.camel@twins> <1351175972.12171.14.camel@twins> <1351241323.12171.43.camel@twins> From: Sasha Levin Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 14:29:59 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [patch for-3.7] mm, mempolicy: fix printing stack contents in numa_maps Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Linus Torvalds , David Rientjes , Mel Gorman , Rik van Riel , Dave Jones , Andrew Morton , KOSAKI Motohiro , bhutchings@solarflare.com, Konstantin Khlebnikov , Naoya Horiguchi , Hugh Dickins , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, 2012-10-25 at 16:09 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> > >> > So I think the below should work, we hold the spinlock over both rb-tree >> > modification as sp free, this makes mpol_shared_policy_lookup() which >> > returns the policy with an incremented refcount work with just the >> > spinlock. >> > >> > Comments? >> >> Looks reasonable, if annoyingly complex for something that shouldn't >> be important enough for this. Oh well. > > I agree with that.. Its just that when doing numa placement one needs to > respect the pre-existing placement constraints. I've not seen a way > around this. > >> However, please check me on this: the need for this is only for >> linux-next right now, correct? All the current users in my tree are ok >> with just the mutex, no? > > Yes, the need comes from the numa stuff and I'll stick this patch in > there. > > I completely missed Mel's patch turning it into a mutex, but I guess > that's what -next is for :-). So I've been fuzzing with it for the past couple of days and it's been looking fine with it. Can someone grab it into his tree please? Thanks, Sasha -- 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