On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 8:06 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Changes since 20130703:
>>
>> The net-next tree lost its build failure.
>>
>> The akpm tree gained a conflict against the kbuild tree and lost lots of
>> patches that turned up elsewhere.
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>
> Just FYI:
> People building with "CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM=n" (still) need an extra patch
> pending in mmots-tree [1].
> ( Unfortunately, it does not cleanly apply against next-20130704. )
>
I have compared both mm/memcontrol.c files from
next-20130703/next-20130704 - they are identical.
These hunks...
[ From Li Zefan ]
@@ -6332,8 +6341,7 @@ static void mem_cgroup_css_free(struct cgroup *cont)
{
struct mem_cgroup *memcg = mem_cgroup_from_cont(cont);
- mem_cgroup_sockets_destroy(memcg);
-
+ memcg_destroy_kmem(memcg);
__mem_cgroup_free(memcg);
}
[ From mmots ]
@@ -6399,8 +6408,7 @@ static void mem_cgroup_css_free(struct c
{
struct mem_cgroup *memcg = mem_cgroup_from_cont(cont);
- mem_cgroup_sockets_destroy(memcg);
-
+ memcg_destroy_kmem(memcg);
mem_cgroup_put(memcg);
}
...seems to differ.
In both mentioned -next releases there exist no mem_cgroup_put() in
mm/memcontrol.c.
So the hunk in mmots seems to be wrong in my eyes.
Andrew? ^^^
- Sedat -
> - Sedat -
>
> [1] http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/memcg-use-css_get-put-when-charging-uncharging-kmem-fix-fix.patch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
