Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757508Ab2JZItU (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Oct 2012 04:49:20 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:39208 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755496Ab2JZItQ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Oct 2012 04:49:16 -0400 Message-ID: <1351241323.12171.43.camel@twins> Subject: Re: [patch for-3.7] mm, mempolicy: fix printing stack contents in numa_maps From: Peter Zijlstra To: Linus Torvalds Cc: David Rientjes , Sasha Levin , 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 Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 10:48:43 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <20121008150949.GA15130@redhat.com> <20121017040515.GA13505@redhat.com> <1351167554.23337.14.camel@twins> <1351175972.12171.14.camel@twins> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1254 Lines: 31 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 :-). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/