From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755936Ab1G2AJV (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:09:21 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:15660 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754031Ab1G2AJU (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:09:20 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,285,1309762800"; d="scan'208";a="31560650" Subject: Re: [PATCH] kswapd: assign new_order and new_classzone_idx after wakeup in sleeping From: "Alex,Shi" To: Mel Gorman Cc: "minchan.kim@gmail.com" , "stable@kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "andrea@cpushare.com" , "Chen, Tim C" , "Li, Shaohua" In-Reply-To: <20110728111203.GM3010@suse.de> References: <1311840688-11388-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@intel.com> <20110728101943.GI3010@suse.de> <1311850029.27358.2408.camel@debian> <20110728111203.GM3010@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 08:10:38 +0800 Message-ID: <1311898238.27358.2416.camel@debian> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Post to linux-mm, cc me. > > > > Acked-by: Mel Gorman > > > > > > It won't be merged to -stable until it goes to mainline though so > > > minimally you need to post this to linux-mm. > > > > > > For -stable, you should explain why it is a candidate. I didn't push > > > the patch at the time because user problems were already resolved > > > and I wanted the merged for 3.0 before revisiting it. What problem > > > did you observe without this patch? With the lack of reference to > > > the other thread or the previous patch, I'm assuming you found and > > > solved the problem independently and I'd like to add a test case. > > > > Actually, our LKP testing didn't find this problem on this point. Even > > with the patch, performance has no change on our machines. I just find > > this by my eyes. > > > > Dang. I figured all right that it was unlikely the patch would > actually fix any problem but it looks correct and shouldnt' cause a > regression. You should resend the patch to Andrew cc'ing the people > in the old thread and linux-mm and ask Padraig Brady to test the > patch to confirm his problem does not reappear. When it gets into > mainline, try for -stable but I think there is very little motivation > for merging it there. Thanks a lot for the suggestions. I will do them.