From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx189.postini.com [74.125.245.189]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 656696B005A for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 08:25:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:25:12 +0000 From: Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [PATCHv19 00/15] Contiguous Memory Allocator Message-ID: <20120130132512.GO25268@csn.ul.ie> References: <1327568457-27734-1-git-send-email-m.szyprowski@samsung.com> <201201261531.40551.arnd@arndb.de> <20120127162624.40cba14e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120127162624.40cba14e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Marek Szyprowski , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, Michal Nazarewicz , Kyungmin Park , Russell King , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Daniel Walker , Jesse Barker , Jonathan Corbet , Shariq Hasnain , Chunsang Jeong , Dave Hansen , Benjamin Gaignard On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 04:26:24PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 15:31:40 +0000 > Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Thursday 26 January 2012, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > > > Welcome everyone! > > > > > > Yes, that's true. This is yet another release of the Contiguous Memory > > > Allocator patches. This version mainly includes code cleanups requested > > > by Mel Gorman and a few minor bug fixes. > > > > Hi Marek, > > > > Thanks for keeping up this work! I really hope it works out for the > > next merge window. > > Someone please tell me when it's time to start paying attention > again ;) > > These patches don't seem to have as many acked-bys and reviewed-bys as > I'd expect. I reviewed the core MM changes and I've acked most of them so the next release should have a few acks where you expect them. I did not add a reviewed-by because I did not build and test the thing. For me, Patch 2 is the only one that must be fixed prior to merging as it can interfere with pages on a remote per-cpu list which is dangerous. I know your suggestion will be to delete the per-cpu lists and be done with it but I am a bit away from doing that just yet. Patch 8 could do with a bit more care too but it is not a potential hand grenade like patch 2 and could be fixed as part of a follow-up. Even if you don't see an ack from me there, it should not be treated as a show stopper. I highlighted some issues on how CMA interacts with reclaim but I think this is a problem specific to CMA and should not prevent it being merged. I just wanted to be sure that the CMA people were aware of the potential issues so they will recognise the class of bug if it occurs. > Given the scope and duration of this, it would be useful > to gather these up. But please ensure they are real ones - people > sometimes like to ack things without showing much sign of having > actually read them. > FWIW, the acks I put on the core MM changes are real acks :) > The patches do seem to have been going round in ever-decreasing circles > lately and I think we have decided to merge them (yes?) so we may as well > get on and do that and sort out remaining issues in-tree. > I'm a lot happier with the core MM patches than I was when I reviewed this first around last September or October. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org