On Wed 02-01-13 10:36:05, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hey, Michal.
>
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 09:53:55AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Hi Li,
> >
> > On Wed 26-12-12 18:51:02, Li Zefan wrote:
> > > I reverted 38d7bee9d24adf4c95676a3dc902827c72930ebb ("cpuset: use N_MEMORY instead N_HIGH_MEMORY")
> > > and applied this patchset against 3.8-rc1.
> >
> > I didn't find any patch in this email.
> > Anyway I am wondering how the above patch could cause the stuck you
> > mention below? The patch just renames N_HIGH_MEMORY -> N_MEMORY which
> > should map to the very same constant so there are no functional changes
> > AFAIU.
>
> Li needed to revert the said patch only to apply the patchset on top
> of 3.8-rc1. The N_MEMORY patch doesn't have anything to do with the
> problem Li is seeing.
Ohh, ok
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>