linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 4

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 4 Jul 2013 10:40:44 +0200
From:	Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 4

On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 8:06 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Changes since 20130703:
>>>
>>> The net-next tree lost its build failure.
>>>
>>> The akpm tree gained a conflict against the kbuild tree and lost lots of
>>> patches that turned up elsewhere.
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>
>> Just FYI:
>> People building with "CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM=n" (still) need an extra patch
>> pending in mmots-tree [1].
>> ( Unfortunately, it does not cleanly apply against next-20130704. )
>>
>
> I have compared both mm/memcontrol.c files from
> next-20130703/next-20130704 - they are identical.
>
> These hunks...
>
> [ From Li Zefan ]
> @@ -6332,8 +6341,7 @@ static void mem_cgroup_css_free(struct cgroup *cont)
>  {
>         struct mem_cgroup *memcg = mem_cgroup_from_cont(cont);
>
> -       mem_cgroup_sockets_destroy(memcg);
> -
> +       memcg_destroy_kmem(memcg);
>         __mem_cgroup_free(memcg);
>  }
>
> [ From mmots ]
> @@ -6399,8 +6408,7 @@ static void mem_cgroup_css_free(struct c
>  {
>         struct mem_cgroup *memcg = mem_cgroup_from_cont(cont);
>
> -       mem_cgroup_sockets_destroy(memcg);
> -
> +       memcg_destroy_kmem(memcg);
>         mem_cgroup_put(memcg);
>  }
>
> ...seems to differ.
>
> In both mentioned -next releases there exist no mem_cgroup_put() in
> mm/memcontrol.c.
> So the hunk in mmots seems to be wrong in my eyes.
>
> Andrew? ^^^
>

Attached v2 patch applies against next-20130704.

- Sedat -

> - Sedat -
>
>> - Sedat -
>>
>> [1] http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/memcg-use-css_get-put-when-charging-uncharging-kmem-fix-fix.patch

Download attachment "memcg-use-css_get-put-when-charging-uncharging-kmem-fix-fix-v2.patch" of type "application/octet-stream" (2229 bytes)