On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sunday, September 12, 2010, Minchan Kim wrote: >> Adnrew, Please drop my old version and merge this verstion. >> (old : vmscan-check-all_unreclaimable-in-direct-reclaim-path.patch) >> >> * Changelog from v2 >> * remove inline - suggested by Andrew >> * add function desription - suggeseted by Adnrew >> >> == CUT HERE == > > For the record, this commit: > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=6715045ddc7472a22be5e49d4047d2d89b391f45 > > is reported to fix the problem without the $subject patch (see > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/9/11/129). So, I'm not sure if it's still necessary > to special case this particular situation? I didn't follow your patch. If your patch can fix the problem, We don't need new overhead direct reclaim without big benefit. So I don't care of dropping this patch. We need agreement of another author KOSAKI. Thanks for the information, Rafael. :) -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href