From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 00/35] kmemcg shrinkers
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 11:59:39 +0400
Message-ID: <51B0416B.6040706@parallels.com>
References: <1370287804-3481-1-git-send-email-glommer@openvz.org> <20130605160721.da995af82eb247ccf8f8537f@linux-foundation.org> <51B02347.60809@parallels.com> <20130606001855.48d9da2e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <51B03C1F.4000501@parallels.com> <20130606004727.c28d62e9.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Glauber Costa <glommer@openvz.org>,
	<linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	<cgroups@vger.kernel.org>, <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, <hughd@google.com>,
	Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx2.parallels.com ([199.115.105.18]:56277 "EHLO
	mx2.parallels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1754580Ab3FFH6m (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 6 Jun 2013 03:58:42 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20130606004727.c28d62e9.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On 06/06/2013 11:47 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Jun 2013 11:37:03 +0400 Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 06/06/2013 11:18 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> The shrinker stuff seems sensible and straightforward and I expect we
>>> can proceed with that at the normal pace.  The memcg changes struck me
>>> as being hairy as hell and I'd really like to see the other memcg
>>> people go through it carefully.
>>>
>>> Of course, "new series" doesn't give you an easily accessible tree to
>>> target.  I could drop it all again to give you a clean shot at
>>> tomorrow's -next?
>> If you just keep them on top (not really sure how hard it is for you), I
>> can just remove them all and apply a new series on top.
> 
> I could do that but then anyone else who wants to test the code has to
> do the same thing.  Dropping them out of -next does seem the clean
> approach.
> 
> We still need to work out what to do with
> memcg-debugging-facility-to-access-dangling-memcgs.patch btw.  See
> other email.
> 
Ok. I am using half of that as official infrastructure now. I will reply
to your comments when I reach that.