Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 22 Jun 2022 11:59:17 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mm tree with the folio tree
Message-Id: <20220622115917.5268aeea70b22a566c90be8c@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAMZfGtVQr=7pUevVbbNK9teskfGsjcoif2sfHQ-YrDx5qHNiXg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20220622153815.6f2e671a@canb.auug.org.au>
        <CAMZfGtVQr=7pUevVbbNK9teskfGsjcoif2sfHQ-YrDx5qHNiXg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 22 Jun 2022 15:22:35 +0800 Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com> wrote:

> > Today's linux-next merge of the mm tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >   mm/vmscan.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> >   15077be8badc ("vmscan: Add check_move_unevictable_folios()")
> 
> Sorry for the conflicts, I didn't see this change in the mm-unstable branch
> yesterday. Based on this commit, I have reworked the following commit
> (see attachment, mainly changes are about check_move_unevictable_folios()).
> Andrew can pick it up if he wants to replace the original patch with
> the new one.

Your comments in
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/YrM2XCwzu65cb81r@FVFYT0MHHV2J.googleapis.com
make me wonder whether simply dropping cca700a8e695 ("mm: lru: use
lruvec lock to serialize memcg changes") would be best?