* linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
@ 2008-11-03 4:26 Stephen Rothwell
2008-11-03 9:39 ` Pekka Enberg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2008-11-03 4:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pekka Enberg, Christoph Lameter
Cc: linux-next, Rik van Riel, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, Andrew Morton,
KOSAKI Motohiro
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in mm/vmstat.c
between commit 556adecba110bf5f1db6c6b56416cfab5bcab698 ("vmscan: second
chance replacement for anonymous pages") from Linus' tree and commit
9fb8a023ad432b0ca884790a8a05991180ab42b6 ("slub: Trigger defragmentation
from memory reclaim") from the slab tree.
Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and will carry the fix
for a few days (during which time I hope it is fixed in the slab tree).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb•auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
diff --cc mm/vmstat.c
index 022418e,5efc2c5..0000000
--- a/mm/vmstat.c
+++ b/mm/vmstat.c
@@@ -774,14 -731,14 +774,16 @@@ static void zoneinfo_show_print(struct
#endif
}
seq_printf(m,
+ "\n slab_defrag_count: %lu"
"\n all_unreclaimable: %u"
"\n prev_priority: %i"
- "\n start_pfn: %lu",
+ "\n start_pfn: %lu"
+ "\n inactive_ratio: %u",
- zone_is_all_unreclaimable(zone),
+ zone->slab_defrag_counter,
+ zone_is_all_unreclaimable(zone),
zone->prev_priority,
- zone->zone_start_pfn);
+ zone->zone_start_pfn,
+ zone->inactive_ratio);
seq_putc(m, '\n');
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
2008-11-03 4:26 linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree Stephen Rothwell
@ 2008-11-03 9:39 ` Pekka Enberg
0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pekka Enberg @ 2008-11-03 9:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Christoph Lameter, linux-next, Rik van Riel, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki,
Andrew Morton, KOSAKI Motohiro
On Mon, 2008-11-03 at 15:26 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in mm/vmstat.c
> between commit 556adecba110bf5f1db6c6b56416cfab5bcab698 ("vmscan: second
> chance replacement for anonymous pages") from Linus' tree and commit
> 9fb8a023ad432b0ca884790a8a05991180ab42b6 ("slub: Trigger defragmentation
> from memory reclaim") from the slab tree.
>
> Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and will carry the fix
> for a few days (during which time I hope it is fixed in the slab tree).
I fixed up this by rebasing the whole series to 2.6.28-rc3. Thanks!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
@ 2008-11-03 4:19 Stephen Rothwell
2008-11-03 4:52 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-03 9:39 ` Pekka Enberg
0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2008-11-03 4:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pekka Enberg, Christoph Lameter
Cc: linux-next, Rik van Riel, Lee Schermerhorn, KOSAKI Motohiro,
Hugh Dickins, Daisuke Nishimura, Andrew Morton
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in mm/vmscan.c
between commit 4f98a2fee8acdb4ac84545df98cccecfd130f8db ("vmscan: split
LRU lists into anon & file sets") from Linus' tree and commit
9fb8a023ad432b0ca884790a8a05991180ab42b6 ("slub: Trigger defragmentation
from memory reclaim") from the slab tree.
Overlapping changes. I fixed it up (see below) and will carry the fix
for a few days (during which time I hope it will be fixed in the slab
tree).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb•auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
diff --cc mm/vmscan.c
index 3b58602,b72cb36..0000000
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@@ -2095,7 -1932,7 +2144,7 @@@ unsigned long shrink_all_memory(unsigne
reclaim_state.reclaimed_slab = 0;
shrink_slab(sc.nr_scanned, sc.gfp_mask,
- global_lru_pages());
- count_lru_pages(), NULL);
++ global_lru_pages(), NULL);
ret += reclaim_state.reclaimed_slab;
if (ret >= nr_pages)
goto out;
@@@ -2112,7 -1949,7 +2161,7 @@@
if (!ret) {
do {
reclaim_state.reclaimed_slab = 0;
- shrink_slab(nr_pages, sc.gfp_mask, global_lru_pages());
- shrink_slab(nr_pages, sc.gfp_mask, count_lru_pages(), NULL);
++ shrink_slab(nr_pages, sc.gfp_mask, global_lru_pages(), NULL);
ret += reclaim_state.reclaimed_slab;
} while (ret < nr_pages && reclaim_state.reclaimed_slab > 0);
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
2008-11-03 4:19 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2008-11-03 4:52 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-03 9:39 ` Pekka Enberg
1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: KOSAKI Motohiro @ 2008-11-03 4:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: kosaki.motohiro, Pekka Enberg, Christoph Lameter, linux-next,
Rik van Riel, Lee Schermerhorn, Hugh Dickins, Daisuke Nishimura,
Andrew Morton
Hi
> Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in mm/vmscan.c
> between commit 4f98a2fee8acdb4ac84545df98cccecfd130f8db ("vmscan: split
> LRU lists into anon & file sets") from Linus' tree and commit
> 9fb8a023ad432b0ca884790a8a05991180ab42b6 ("slub: Trigger defragmentation
> from memory reclaim") from the slab tree.
>
> Overlapping changes. I fixed it up (see below) and will carry the fix
> for a few days (during which time I hope it will be fixed in the slab
> tree).
looks good to me.
thanks, stephen.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
2008-11-03 4:19 Stephen Rothwell
2008-11-03 4:52 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
@ 2008-11-03 9:39 ` Pekka Enberg
1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pekka Enberg @ 2008-11-03 9:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Christoph Lameter, linux-next, Rik van Riel, Lee Schermerhorn,
KOSAKI Motohiro, Hugh Dickins, Daisuke Nishimura, Andrew Morton
On Mon, 2008-11-03 at 15:19 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in mm/vmscan.c
> between commit 4f98a2fee8acdb4ac84545df98cccecfd130f8db ("vmscan: split
> LRU lists into anon & file sets") from Linus' tree and commit
> 9fb8a023ad432b0ca884790a8a05991180ab42b6 ("slub: Trigger defragmentation
> from memory reclaim") from the slab tree.
>
> Overlapping changes. I fixed it up (see below) and will carry the fix
> for a few days (during which time I hope it will be fixed in the slab
> tree).
I fixed up this by rebasing the whole series to 2.6.28-rc3. Thanks!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
@ 2008-11-03 4:07 Stephen Rothwell
2008-11-03 9:38 ` Pekka Enberg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2008-11-03 4:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pekka Enberg, Christoph Lameter; +Cc: linux-next, Alexey Dobriyan
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in
fs/proc/inode.c between commit 5bcd7ff9e1690dbdbccb2a1cb3c2ea8b8381c435
("proc: proc_init_inodecache() can't fail") from Linus' tree and commit
f7f650b4b85ad364072936db9e6beddcb2ca33b8 ("Filesystem: /proc filesystem
support for slab defrag") from the slab tree.
It is just a context change. I fixed it up (see below) and will carry the
fix for a couple of days (during which time it will hopefully be fixed in
your tree).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb•auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
diff --cc fs/proc/inode.c
index 2543fd0,54f8137..0000000
--- a/fs/proc/inode.c
+++ b/fs/proc/inode.c
@@@ -106,13 -106,22 +106,21 @@@ static void init_once(void *foo
inode_init_once(&ei->vfs_inode);
}
+ static void *proc_get_inodes(struct kmem_cache *s, int nr, void **v)
+ {
+ return fs_get_inodes(s, nr, v,
+ offsetof(struct proc_inode, vfs_inode));
+ };
+
-int __init proc_init_inodecache(void)
+void __init proc_init_inodecache(void)
{
proc_inode_cachep = kmem_cache_create("proc_inode_cache",
sizeof(struct proc_inode),
0, (SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT|
SLAB_MEM_SPREAD|SLAB_PANIC),
init_once);
+ kmem_cache_setup_defrag(proc_inode_cachep,
+ proc_get_inodes, kick_inodes);
- return 0;
}
static const struct super_operations proc_sops = {
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
2008-11-03 4:07 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2008-11-03 9:38 ` Pekka Enberg
0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pekka Enberg @ 2008-11-03 9:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: Christoph Lameter, linux-next, Alexey Dobriyan
Hi Stephen,
On Mon, 2008-11-03 at 15:07 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in
> fs/proc/inode.c between commit 5bcd7ff9e1690dbdbccb2a1cb3c2ea8b8381c435
> ("proc: proc_init_inodecache() can't fail") from Linus' tree and commit
> f7f650b4b85ad364072936db9e6beddcb2ca33b8 ("Filesystem: /proc filesystem
> support for slab defrag") from the slab tree.
>
> It is just a context change. I fixed it up (see below) and will carry the
> fix for a couple of days (during which time it will hopefully be fixed in
> your tree).
I fixed up this by rebasing the whole series to 2.6.28-rc3. Thanks!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
@ 2008-10-21 4:55 Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2008-10-21 4:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pekka Enberg, Christoph Lameter
Cc: linux-next, Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Hi Pekka, Christoph,
Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a trivial conflict in
mm/Makefile between commit 52d4b9ac0b985168009c2a57098324e67bae171f
("memcg: allocate all page_cgroup at boot") from Linus' tree and commit
16c47ef3e86307c58149f417a6fa4925b90c7e9f ("kmemtrace: Core
implementation") from the slab tree.
Just a context change. I fixed it up (see below).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb•auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
diff --cc mm/Makefile
index c06b45a,7f42d55..0000000
--- a/mm/Makefile
+++ b/mm/Makefile
@@@ -33,4 -33,5 +33,5 @@@ obj-$(CONFIG_FS_XIP) += filemap_xip.
obj-$(CONFIG_MIGRATION) += migrate.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += allocpercpu.o
obj-$(CONFIG_QUICKLIST) += quicklist.o
-obj-$(CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR) += memcontrol.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR) += memcontrol.o page_cgroup.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_KMEMTRACE) += kmemtrace.o
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
@ 2008-08-13 4:57 Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-13 6:19 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-08-13 7:21 ` Pekka Enberg
0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2008-08-13 4:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pekka Enberg, Christoph Lameter
Cc: linux-next, Randy Dunlap, Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 484 bytes --]
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in
lib/Kconfig.debug between commit 3794f3e812ef707a4f7931742274d1d0ca6597b4
("docsrc: build Documentation/ sources") from Linus' tree and commit
5db80305ad7ea891246aec24204630c2925e7b12 ("kmemtrace: Core
implementation") from the slab tree.
Just a matter of overlapping additions. I took both sets.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb•auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
2008-08-13 4:57 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2008-08-13 6:19 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-08-13 7:11 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-13 7:21 ` Pekka Enberg
1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pekka Enberg @ 2008-08-13 6:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Christoph Lameter, linux-next, Randy Dunlap,
Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu
Hi Stephen,
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in
> lib/Kconfig.debug between commit 3794f3e812ef707a4f7931742274d1d0ca6597b4
> ("docsrc: build Documentation/ sources") from Linus' tree and commit
> 5db80305ad7ea891246aec24204630c2925e7b12 ("kmemtrace: Core
> implementation") from the slab tree.
>
> Just a matter of overlapping additions. I took both sets.
Can I fix this up in my tree? Mine is based on Linus so should I rebase
my 'for-next' branch on top of linux-next?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
2008-08-13 6:19 ` Pekka Enberg
@ 2008-08-13 7:11 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-13 7:10 ` Pekka Enberg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2008-08-13 7:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pekka Enberg
Cc: Christoph Lameter, linux-next, Randy Dunlap,
Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1430 bytes --]
Hi Pekka,
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 09:19:27 +0300 Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs•helsinki.fi> wrote:
>
> Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in
> > lib/Kconfig.debug between commit 3794f3e812ef707a4f7931742274d1d0ca6597b4
> > ("docsrc: build Documentation/ sources") from Linus' tree and commit
> > 5db80305ad7ea891246aec24204630c2925e7b12 ("kmemtrace: Core
> > implementation") from the slab tree.
> >
> > Just a matter of overlapping additions. I took both sets.
>
> Can I fix this up in my tree? Mine is based on Linus so should I rebase
> my 'for-next' branch on top of linux-next?
You should *never* base anything on linux-next if it is to be included in
linux-next. What you should do is merge in Linus' latest tree (since
that is the other side of the conflict, in this case) and you will get the
same conflict and you can fix it in the merge that you do. Then tomorrow,
I won't see the conflict when I do my merge of your updated tree.
This is not urgent, though, as "git rerere" will redo the fixup for me
tomorrow if you haven't fixed it.
If I get conflicts between your tree and other trees in linus-next, there
is generally nothing you can do about it and I will just have to fix the
conflict each day. This is as it should be. :-)
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb•auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
2008-08-13 7:11 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2008-08-13 7:10 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-08-13 7:36 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pekka Enberg @ 2008-08-13 7:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Christoph Lameter, linux-next, Randy Dunlap,
Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu, vegard.nossum
Hi Stephen,
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> You should *never* base anything on linux-next if it is to be included in
> linux-next. What you should do is merge in Linus' latest tree (since
> that is the other side of the conflict, in this case) and you will get the
> same conflict and you can fix it in the merge that you do. Then tomorrow,
> I won't see the conflict when I do my merge of your updated tree.
OK, thanks! But what about kmemcheck then? We have conflicts there that
won't be resolved until 2.6.28. Does this mean I should grab the
kmemcheck patches to my tree now to fix them?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
2008-08-13 7:10 ` Pekka Enberg
@ 2008-08-13 7:36 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2008-08-13 7:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pekka Enberg
Cc: Christoph Lameter, linux-next, Randy Dunlap,
Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu, vegard.nossum
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 469 bytes --]
Hi Pekka,
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 10:10:47 +0300 Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs•helsinki.fi> wrote:
>
> OK, thanks! But what about kmemcheck then? We have conflicts there that
> won't be resolved until 2.6.28. Does this mean I should grab the
> kmemcheck patches to my tree now to fix them?
I wouldn't worry about it for now, the conflicts are all trivial.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb•auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree
2008-08-13 4:57 Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-13 6:19 ` Pekka Enberg
@ 2008-08-13 7:21 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-08-13 7:40 ` Stephen Rothwell
1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pekka Enberg @ 2008-08-13 7:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Christoph Lameter, linux-next, Randy Dunlap,
Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the slab tree got a conflict in
> lib/Kconfig.debug between commit 3794f3e812ef707a4f7931742274d1d0ca6597b4
> ("docsrc: build Documentation/ sources") from Linus' tree and commit
> 5db80305ad7ea891246aec24204630c2925e7b12 ("kmemtrace: Core
> implementation") from the slab tree.
I've now fixed up the conflict in my tree. Thanks Stephen!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-11-03 9:38 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-11-03 4:26 linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree Stephen Rothwell
2008-11-03 9:39 ` Pekka Enberg
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-11-03 4:19 Stephen Rothwell
2008-11-03 4:52 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-03 9:39 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-11-03 4:07 Stephen Rothwell
2008-11-03 9:38 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-10-21 4:55 Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-13 4:57 Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-13 6:19 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-08-13 7:11 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-13 7:10 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-08-13 7:36 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-13 7:21 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-08-13 7:40 ` Stephen Rothwell
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox