[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130102153605.GB11220@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 10:36:05 -0500
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
Cc: Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>, paul@...lmenage.org,
glommer@...allels.com, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
bsingharora@...il.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET cgroup/for-3.8] cpuset: decouple cpuset locking from
cgroup core
Hey, Michal.
On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 09:53:55AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Hi Li,
>
> On Wed 26-12-12 18:51:02, Li Zefan wrote:
> > I reverted 38d7bee9d24adf4c95676a3dc902827c72930ebb ("cpuset: use N_MEMORY instead N_HIGH_MEMORY")
> > and applied this patchset against 3.8-rc1.
>
> I didn't find any patch in this email.
> Anyway I am wondering how the above patch could cause the stuck you
> mention below? The patch just renames N_HIGH_MEMORY -> N_MEMORY which
> should map to the very same constant so there are no functional changes
> AFAIU.
Li needed to revert the said patch only to apply the patchset on top
of 3.8-rc1. The N_MEMORY patch doesn't have anything to do with the
problem Li is seeing.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists