MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1351241323.12171.43.camel@twins>
References: <20121008150949.GA15130@redhat.com> <CAHGf_=pr1AYeWZhaC2MKN-XjiWB7=hs92V0sH-zVw3i00X-e=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210152055150.5400@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <CAHGf_=rLjQbtWQLDcbsaq5=zcZgjdveaOVdGtBgBwZFt78py4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210152306320.9480@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <CAHGf_=pemT6rcbu=dBVSJE7GuGWwVFP+Wn-mwkcsZ_gBGfaOsg@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210161657220.14014@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210161714110.17278@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <20121017040515.GA13505@redhat.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210162222100.26279@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <CA+1xoqe74R6DX8Yx2dsp1MkaWkC1u6yAEd8eWEdiwi88pYdPaw@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210241633290.22819@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <CA+1xoqd6MEFP-eWdnWOrcz2EmE6tpd7UhgJyS8HjQ8qrGaMMMw@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210241659260.22819@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
 <1351167554.23337.14.camel@twins> <1351175972.12171.14.camel@twins>
 <CA+55aFzoxMYLXdBvdMYTy_LhrVuU233qh1eDyAda5otUTHojPA@mail.gmail.com> <1351241323.12171.43.camel@twins>
From: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 14:29:59 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+1xoqcbPGpFvhJG3OMDYBPMD0+1umJv1wyE-b+KHtKi_s4unQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [patch for-3.7] mm, mempolicy: fix printing stack contents in numa_maps
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>, bhutchings@solarflare.com,
        Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1517
Lines: 39

On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-10-25 at 16:09 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> 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 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/