From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754281Ab2G3PiL (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2012 11:38:11 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:41221 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753798Ab2G3PiJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2012 11:38:09 -0400 Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:38:06 -0700 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski Cc: Mel Gorman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, Miao Xie , David Rientjes , Peter Zijlstra , Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [ 39/40] cpuset: mm: reduce large amounts of memory barrier related damage v3 Message-ID: <20120730153806.GA29697@kroah.com> References: <20120726211424.GA7709@kroah.com> <20120726211411.164006056@linuxfoundation.org> <20120726211414.752069185@linuxfoundation.org> <20120727150823.GD3033@herton-Z68MA-D2H-B3> <20120727152347.GG612@suse.de> <20120727190116.GA29646@kroah.com> <20120728050230.GA9155@herton-Z68MA-D2H-B3> <20120730153731.GA28633@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120730153731.GA28633@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 08:37:31AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 02:02:31AM -0300, Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski wrote: > > Thanks. I saw what seems another issue now on the patch too, sorry for > > not noticing earlier: this backport is lacking the > > write_seqcount_{begin,end} on set_mems_allowed for the case with > > CONFIG_CPUSETS, like in the original patch: > > > > static inline void set_mems_allowed(nodemask_t nodemask) > > { > > task_lock(current); > > + write_seqcount_begin(¤t->mems_allowed_seq); > > current->mems_allowed = nodemask; > > + write_seqcount_end(¤t->mems_allowed_seq); > > task_unlock(current); > > } > > > > Ok, but that's not in a patch format that I can apply :( > > Care to redo it so I can add it to the existing patch? Oh nevermind, Mel already did it. Time for more coffee... greg k-h