From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266457AbUIMIqu (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Sep 2004 04:46:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266459AbUIMIqu (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Sep 2004 04:46:50 -0400 Received: from omx1-ext.sgi.com ([192.48.179.11]:30942 "EHLO omx1.americas.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266457AbUIMIqm (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Sep 2004 04:46:42 -0400 Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 01:46:22 -0700 From: Paul Jackson To: Andrew Morton Cc: ak@suse.de, bcasavan@sgi.com, anton@samba.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org Subject: Re: more numa maxnode confusions Message-Id: <20040913014622.3addde90.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20040913001548.278bf672.akpm@osdl.org> References: <20040912200253.3d7a6ff5.pj@sgi.com> <20040913065621.GB12185@wotan.suse.de> <20040913001548.278bf672.akpm@osdl.org> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew asked: > Revert what? The immediate change Andi wants reverted only matters at present in Linus' bk tree. My main cpuset patch in your *-mm tree already does the reversion in *-mm (unfortunately - collision details follow ...). So I presume that Linus' will apply Andi's reversion patch of earlier this evening to his bk tree. But then when you pull in Linus's latest bk changes into your linus.patch, this will collide with my main cpuset patch. Both patches will be trying to add back in the same line: --maxnode; to get_nodes() in mm/mempolicy.c. My guess is that now that you and Linus know about this, you two can handle the collision by hand - both new lines of code agree on what's to be done: add the above line back in. But if there is some other permutation of patches that I can send that would be smoother, let me know. The one alternative I can think of that would allow everyone to put this back on autopilot and forget the details, would be to _remove_ the following segment of my cpusets-big-numa-cpu-and-memory-placement.patch: @@ -133,6 +134,7 @@ static int get_nodes(unsigned long *node unsigned long nlongs; unsigned long endmask; + --maxnode; bitmap_zero(nodes, MAX_NUMNODES); if (maxnode == 0 || !nmask) return 0; so that Andi's latest reversion path applied cleanly when it came back at you from Linus' bk tree. But I understand that usually you like to layer new patches, not replace or edit existing ones. Go ahead and remove the above segment, if that seems best to you. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.650.933.1373