* [V5 PATCH 08/26] memcontrol: use N_MEMORY instead N_HIGH_MEMORY [not found] ` <1351523301-20048-1-git-send-email-laijs-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org> @ 2012-10-29 15:20 ` Lai Jiangshan [not found] ` <1351524078-20363-7-git-send-email-laijs-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Lai Jiangshan @ 2012-10-29 15:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mel Gorman, David Rientjes, LKML, x86 maintainers Cc: Jiang Liu, Rusty Russell, Michal Hocko, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg, Yasuaki ISIMATU, Johannes Weiner, Tejun Heo, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, Andrew Morton, Yinghai Lu, containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA N_HIGH_MEMORY stands for the nodes that has normal or high memory. N_MEMORY stands for the nodes that has any memory. The code here need to handle with the nodes which have memory, we should use N_MEMORY instead. Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org> --- mm/memcontrol.c | 18 +++++++++--------- mm/page_cgroup.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c index 7acf43b..1b69665 100644 --- a/mm/memcontrol.c +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c @@ -800,7 +800,7 @@ static unsigned long mem_cgroup_nr_lru_pages(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int nid; u64 total = 0; - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) total += mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages(memcg, nid, lru_mask); return total; } @@ -1611,9 +1611,9 @@ static void mem_cgroup_may_update_nodemask(struct mem_cgroup *memcg) return; /* make a nodemask where this memcg uses memory from */ - memcg->scan_nodes = node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY]; + memcg->scan_nodes = node_states[N_MEMORY]; - for_each_node_mask(nid, node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY]) { + for_each_node_mask(nid, node_states[N_MEMORY]) { if (!test_mem_cgroup_node_reclaimable(memcg, nid, false)) node_clear(nid, memcg->scan_nodes); @@ -1684,7 +1684,7 @@ static bool mem_cgroup_reclaimable(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, bool noswap) /* * Check rest of nodes. */ - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) { if (node_isset(nid, memcg->scan_nodes)) continue; if (test_mem_cgroup_node_reclaimable(memcg, nid, noswap)) @@ -3759,7 +3759,7 @@ move_account: drain_all_stock_sync(memcg); ret = 0; mem_cgroup_start_move(memcg); - for_each_node_state(node, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { + for_each_node_state(node, N_MEMORY) { for (zid = 0; !ret && zid < MAX_NR_ZONES; zid++) { enum lru_list lru; for_each_lru(lru) { @@ -4087,7 +4087,7 @@ static int memcg_numa_stat_show(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft, total_nr = mem_cgroup_nr_lru_pages(memcg, LRU_ALL); seq_printf(m, "total=%lu", total_nr); - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) { node_nr = mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages(memcg, nid, LRU_ALL); seq_printf(m, " N%d=%lu", nid, node_nr); } @@ -4095,7 +4095,7 @@ static int memcg_numa_stat_show(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft, file_nr = mem_cgroup_nr_lru_pages(memcg, LRU_ALL_FILE); seq_printf(m, "file=%lu", file_nr); - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) { node_nr = mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages(memcg, nid, LRU_ALL_FILE); seq_printf(m, " N%d=%lu", nid, node_nr); @@ -4104,7 +4104,7 @@ static int memcg_numa_stat_show(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft, anon_nr = mem_cgroup_nr_lru_pages(memcg, LRU_ALL_ANON); seq_printf(m, "anon=%lu", anon_nr); - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) { node_nr = mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages(memcg, nid, LRU_ALL_ANON); seq_printf(m, " N%d=%lu", nid, node_nr); @@ -4113,7 +4113,7 @@ static int memcg_numa_stat_show(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft, unevictable_nr = mem_cgroup_nr_lru_pages(memcg, BIT(LRU_UNEVICTABLE)); seq_printf(m, "unevictable=%lu", unevictable_nr); - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) { node_nr = mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages(memcg, nid, BIT(LRU_UNEVICTABLE)); seq_printf(m, " N%d=%lu", nid, node_nr); diff --git a/mm/page_cgroup.c b/mm/page_cgroup.c index 5ddad0c..c1054ad 100644 --- a/mm/page_cgroup.c +++ b/mm/page_cgroup.c @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ void __init page_cgroup_init(void) if (mem_cgroup_disabled()) return; - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) { unsigned long start_pfn, end_pfn; start_pfn = node_start_pfn(nid); -- 1.7.4.4 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <1351524078-20363-7-git-send-email-laijs-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [V5 PATCH 08/26] memcontrol: use N_MEMORY instead N_HIGH_MEMORY [not found] ` <1351524078-20363-7-git-send-email-laijs-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org> @ 2012-10-29 16:22 ` Michal Hocko 2012-10-29 20:40 ` David Rientjes 2012-10-31 13:18 ` Michal Hocko 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2012-10-29 16:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lai Jiangshan Cc: Mel Gorman, David Rientjes, LKML, x86 maintainers, Jiang Liu, Rusty Russell, Yinghai Lu, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, Yasuaki ISIMATU, Andrew Morton, Johannes Weiner, Balbir Singh, Tejun Heo, Li Zefan, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg, containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA On Mon 29-10-12 23:20:58, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > N_HIGH_MEMORY stands for the nodes that has normal or high memory. > N_MEMORY stands for the nodes that has any memory. What is the difference of those two? > The code here need to handle with the nodes which have memory, we should > use N_MEMORY instead. > > Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org> > --- > mm/memcontrol.c | 18 +++++++++--------- > mm/page_cgroup.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c > index 7acf43b..1b69665 100644 > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c > @@ -800,7 +800,7 @@ static unsigned long mem_cgroup_nr_lru_pages(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, > int nid; > u64 total = 0; > > - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) > + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) > total += mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages(memcg, nid, lru_mask); > return total; > } > @@ -1611,9 +1611,9 @@ static void mem_cgroup_may_update_nodemask(struct mem_cgroup *memcg) > return; > > /* make a nodemask where this memcg uses memory from */ > - memcg->scan_nodes = node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY]; > + memcg->scan_nodes = node_states[N_MEMORY]; > > - for_each_node_mask(nid, node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY]) { > + for_each_node_mask(nid, node_states[N_MEMORY]) { > > if (!test_mem_cgroup_node_reclaimable(memcg, nid, false)) > node_clear(nid, memcg->scan_nodes); > @@ -1684,7 +1684,7 @@ static bool mem_cgroup_reclaimable(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, bool noswap) > /* > * Check rest of nodes. > */ > - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { > + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) { > if (node_isset(nid, memcg->scan_nodes)) > continue; > if (test_mem_cgroup_node_reclaimable(memcg, nid, noswap)) > @@ -3759,7 +3759,7 @@ move_account: > drain_all_stock_sync(memcg); > ret = 0; > mem_cgroup_start_move(memcg); > - for_each_node_state(node, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { > + for_each_node_state(node, N_MEMORY) { > for (zid = 0; !ret && zid < MAX_NR_ZONES; zid++) { > enum lru_list lru; > for_each_lru(lru) { > @@ -4087,7 +4087,7 @@ static int memcg_numa_stat_show(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft, > > total_nr = mem_cgroup_nr_lru_pages(memcg, LRU_ALL); > seq_printf(m, "total=%lu", total_nr); > - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { > + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) { > node_nr = mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages(memcg, nid, LRU_ALL); > seq_printf(m, " N%d=%lu", nid, node_nr); > } > @@ -4095,7 +4095,7 @@ static int memcg_numa_stat_show(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft, > > file_nr = mem_cgroup_nr_lru_pages(memcg, LRU_ALL_FILE); > seq_printf(m, "file=%lu", file_nr); > - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { > + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) { > node_nr = mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages(memcg, nid, > LRU_ALL_FILE); > seq_printf(m, " N%d=%lu", nid, node_nr); > @@ -4104,7 +4104,7 @@ static int memcg_numa_stat_show(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft, > > anon_nr = mem_cgroup_nr_lru_pages(memcg, LRU_ALL_ANON); > seq_printf(m, "anon=%lu", anon_nr); > - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { > + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) { > node_nr = mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages(memcg, nid, > LRU_ALL_ANON); > seq_printf(m, " N%d=%lu", nid, node_nr); > @@ -4113,7 +4113,7 @@ static int memcg_numa_stat_show(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft, > > unevictable_nr = mem_cgroup_nr_lru_pages(memcg, BIT(LRU_UNEVICTABLE)); > seq_printf(m, "unevictable=%lu", unevictable_nr); > - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { > + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) { > node_nr = mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages(memcg, nid, > BIT(LRU_UNEVICTABLE)); > seq_printf(m, " N%d=%lu", nid, node_nr); > diff --git a/mm/page_cgroup.c b/mm/page_cgroup.c > index 5ddad0c..c1054ad 100644 > --- a/mm/page_cgroup.c > +++ b/mm/page_cgroup.c > @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ void __init page_cgroup_init(void) > if (mem_cgroup_disabled()) > return; > > - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { > + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) { > unsigned long start_pfn, end_pfn; > > start_pfn = node_start_pfn(nid); > -- > 1.7.4.4 > -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [V5 PATCH 08/26] memcontrol: use N_MEMORY instead N_HIGH_MEMORY 2012-10-29 16:22 ` Michal Hocko @ 2012-10-29 20:40 ` David Rientjes [not found] ` <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210291340100.18552-X6Q0R45D7oAcqpCFd4KODRPsWskHk0ljAL8bYrjMMd8@public.gmane.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: David Rientjes @ 2012-10-29 20:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michal Hocko Cc: Lai Jiangshan, Mel Gorman, LKML, x86 maintainers, Jiang Liu, Rusty Russell, Yinghai Lu, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, Yasuaki ISIMATU, Andrew Morton, Johannes Weiner, Balbir Singh, Tejun Heo, Li Zefan, cgroups, linux-mm, containers On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Michal Hocko wrote: > > N_HIGH_MEMORY stands for the nodes that has normal or high memory. > > N_MEMORY stands for the nodes that has any memory. > > What is the difference of those two? > Patch 5 in the series introduces it to be equal to N_HIGH_MEMORY, so accepting this patch would be an implicit ack of the direction taken there. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210291340100.18552-X6Q0R45D7oAcqpCFd4KODRPsWskHk0ljAL8bYrjMMd8@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [V5 PATCH 08/26] memcontrol: use N_MEMORY instead N_HIGH_MEMORY [not found] ` <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210291340100.18552-X6Q0R45D7oAcqpCFd4KODRPsWskHk0ljAL8bYrjMMd8@public.gmane.org> @ 2012-10-29 20:58 ` Michal Hocko [not found] ` <20121029205806.GB21640-2MMpYkNvuYDjFM9bn6wA6Q@public.gmane.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2012-10-29 20:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Rientjes Cc: x86 maintainers, Rusty Russell, LKML, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg, Yasuaki ISIMATU, Mel Gorman, Johannes Weiner, Tejun Heo, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, Andrew Morton, Yinghai Lu, containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA, Jiang Liu On Mon 29-10-12 13:40:39, David Rientjes wrote: > On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > N_HIGH_MEMORY stands for the nodes that has normal or high memory. > > > N_MEMORY stands for the nodes that has any memory. > > > > What is the difference of those two? > > > > Patch 5 in the series Strange, I do not see that one at the mailing list. > introduces it to be equal to N_HIGH_MEMORY, so So this is just a rename? If yes it would be much esier if it was mentioned in the patch description. > accepting this patch would be an implicit ack of the direction taken > there. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20121029205806.GB21640-2MMpYkNvuYDjFM9bn6wA6Q@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [V5 PATCH 08/26] memcontrol: use N_MEMORY instead N_HIGH_MEMORY [not found] ` <20121029205806.GB21640-2MMpYkNvuYDjFM9bn6wA6Q@public.gmane.org> @ 2012-10-29 21:08 ` David Rientjes [not found] ` <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210291405100.18552-X6Q0R45D7oAcqpCFd4KODRPsWskHk0ljAL8bYrjMMd8@public.gmane.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: David Rientjes @ 2012-10-29 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michal Hocko Cc: x86 maintainers, Rusty Russell, LKML, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg, Yasuaki ISIMATU, Mel Gorman, Johannes Weiner, Tejun Heo, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, Andrew Morton, Yinghai Lu, containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA, Jiang Liu On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > N_HIGH_MEMORY stands for the nodes that has normal or high memory. > > > > N_MEMORY stands for the nodes that has any memory. > > > > > > What is the difference of those two? > > > > > > > Patch 5 in the series > > Strange, I do not see that one at the mailing list. > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=135152595827692 > > introduces it to be equal to N_HIGH_MEMORY, so > > So this is just a rename? If yes it would be much esier if it was > mentioned in the patch description. > It's not even a rename even though it should be, it's adding yet another node_states that is equal to N_HIGH_MEMORY since that state already includes all memory. It's just a matter of taste but I think we should be renaming it instead of aliasing it (unless you actually want to make N_HIGH_MEMORY only include nodes with highmem, but nothing depends on that). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210291405100.18552-X6Q0R45D7oAcqpCFd4KODRPsWskHk0ljAL8bYrjMMd8@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [V5 PATCH 08/26] memcontrol: use N_MEMORY instead N_HIGH_MEMORY [not found] ` <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210291405100.18552-X6Q0R45D7oAcqpCFd4KODRPsWskHk0ljAL8bYrjMMd8@public.gmane.org> @ 2012-10-29 21:34 ` Michal Hocko 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2012-10-29 21:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Rientjes Cc: Lai Jiangshan, Mel Gorman, LKML, x86 maintainers, Jiang Liu, Rusty Russell, Yinghai Lu, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, Yasuaki ISIMATU, Andrew Morton, Johannes Weiner, Balbir Singh, Tejun Heo, Li Zefan, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg, containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA On Mon 29-10-12 14:08:05, David Rientjes wrote: > On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > N_HIGH_MEMORY stands for the nodes that has normal or high memory. > > > > > N_MEMORY stands for the nodes that has any memory. > > > > > > > > What is the difference of those two? > > > > > > > > > > Patch 5 in the series > > > > Strange, I do not see that one at the mailing list. > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=135152595827692 Thanks! > > > introduces it to be equal to N_HIGH_MEMORY, so > > > > So this is just a rename? If yes it would be much esier if it was > > mentioned in the patch description. > > > > It's not even a rename even though it should be, it's adding yet another > node_states that is equal to N_HIGH_MEMORY since that state already > includes all memory. Which is really strange because I do not see any reason for yet another alias if the follow up patches rename all of them (I didn't try to apply the whole series to check that so I might be wrong here). > It's just a matter of taste but I think we should be renaming it > instead of aliasing it (unless you actually want to make N_HIGH_MEMORY > only include nodes with highmem, but nothing depends on that). Agreed, I've always considered N_HIGH_MEMORY misleading and confusing so renaming it would really make a lot of sense to me. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [V5 PATCH 08/26] memcontrol: use N_MEMORY instead N_HIGH_MEMORY [not found] ` <1351524078-20363-7-git-send-email-laijs-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org> 2012-10-29 16:22 ` Michal Hocko @ 2012-10-31 13:18 ` Michal Hocko 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Michal Hocko @ 2012-10-31 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lai Jiangshan, Wen Congyang Cc: Mel Gorman, David Rientjes, LKML, x86 maintainers, Jiang Liu, Rusty Russell, Yinghai Lu, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, Yasuaki ISIMATU, Andrew Morton, Johannes Weiner, Balbir Singh, Tejun Heo, Li Zefan, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg, containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA, Christoph Lameter, Hillf Danton On Wed 31-10-12 15:03:36, Wen Congyang wrote: > At 10/30/2012 04:46 AM, David Rientjes Wrote: > > On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Lai Jiangshan wrote: [...] > >> In one word, we need a N_MEMORY. We just intrude it as an alias to > >> N_HIGH_MEMORY and fix all im-proper usages of N_HIGH_MEMORY in late patches. > >> > > > > If this is really that problematic (and it appears it's not given that > > there are many use cases of it and people tend to get it right), then why > > not simply rename N_HIGH_MEMORY instead of introducing yet another > > nodemask to the equation? > > The reason is that we need a node which only contains movable memory. This > feature is very important for node hotplug. So we will add a new nodemask > for movable memory. N_MEMORY contains movable memory but N_HIGH_MEMORY > doesn't contain it. OK, so the N_MOVABLE_MEMORY (or how you will call it) requires that all the allocations will be migrateable? How do you want to achieve that with the page_cgroup descriptors? (see bellow) On Mon 29-10-12 23:20:58, Lai Jiangshan wrote: [...] > diff --git a/mm/page_cgroup.c b/mm/page_cgroup.c > index 5ddad0c..c1054ad 100644 > --- a/mm/page_cgroup.c > +++ b/mm/page_cgroup.c > @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ void __init page_cgroup_init(void) > if (mem_cgroup_disabled()) > return; > > - for_each_node_state(nid, N_HIGH_MEMORY) { > + for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) { > unsigned long start_pfn, end_pfn; > > start_pfn = node_start_pfn(nid); This will call init_section_page_cgroup(pfn, nid) later which allocates page_cgroup descriptors which are not movable. Or is there any code in your patchset that handles this? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <5090CD48.30604@cn.fujitsu.com>]
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-10-31 13:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <1351523301-20048-1-git-send-email-laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
[not found] ` <1351523301-20048-1-git-send-email-laijs-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-29 15:20 ` [V5 PATCH 08/26] memcontrol: use N_MEMORY instead N_HIGH_MEMORY Lai Jiangshan
[not found] ` <1351524078-20363-7-git-send-email-laijs-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-29 16:22 ` Michal Hocko
2012-10-29 20:40 ` David Rientjes
[not found] ` <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210291340100.18552-X6Q0R45D7oAcqpCFd4KODRPsWskHk0ljAL8bYrjMMd8@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-29 20:58 ` Michal Hocko
[not found] ` <20121029205806.GB21640-2MMpYkNvuYDjFM9bn6wA6Q@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-29 21:08 ` David Rientjes
[not found] ` <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210291405100.18552-X6Q0R45D7oAcqpCFd4KODRPsWskHk0ljAL8bYrjMMd8@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-29 21:34 ` Michal Hocko
2012-10-31 13:18 ` Michal Hocko
[not found] <5090CD48.30604@cn.fujitsu.com>
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox