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]
Message-Id: <20220622115917.5268aeea70b22a566c90be8c@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Wed, 22 Jun 2022 11:59:17 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mm tree with the folio tree

On Wed, 22 Jun 2022 15:22:35 +0800 Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.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?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ