From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx205.postini.com [74.125.245.205]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1F8396B004D for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:28:35 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 15:28:32 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Revert "hugetlb: avoid taking i_mmap_mutex in unmap_single_vma() for hugetlb" Message-Id: <20120730152832.f27152d0.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <877gtp5dnr.fsf@skywalker.in.ibm.com> References: <1343385965-7738-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <1343385965-7738-2-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <877gtp5dnr.fsf@skywalker.in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Cc: Mel Gorman , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Hugh Dickins , Rik van Riel , Larry Woodman , Michal Hocko , Ken Chen , Cong Wang , Linux-MM , LKML On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 22:45:04 +0530 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" wrote: > > > > Unless Aneesh has another reason for the patch, it should be reverted > > to preserve hugetlb page sharing locking. > > > > I guess we want to take this patch as a revert patch rather than > dropping the one in -mm. That would help in documenting the i_mmap_mutex > locking details in commit message. Or may be we should add necessary > comments around the locking ? Code comments would be better if possible - we shouldn't force people to dig around in git history to understand small code snippets. -- 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: email@kvack.org