The patch titled
Subject: mm/memcontrol.c:mem_cgroup_select_victim_node(): clarify comment
has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was
mm-memcontrolc-mem_cgroup_select_victim_node-clarify-comment.patch
This patch was dropped because it was merged into mainline or a subsystem tree
------------------------------------------------------
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: mm/memcontrol.c:mem_cgroup_select_victim_node(): clarify comment
> The comment seems to have not much to do with the code?
I guess the comment tries to say that the code path is triggered when we
charge the page which happens _before_ it is added to the LRU list and
so last_scanned_node might contain the stale data.
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 7 +++----
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff -puN mm/memcontrol.c~mm-memcontrolc-mem_cgroup_select_victim_node-clarify-comment mm/memcontrol.c
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c~mm-memcontrolc-mem_cgroup_select_victim_node-clarify-comment
+++ a/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -1391,10 +1391,9 @@ int mem_cgroup_select_victim_node(struct
node = next_node_in(node, memcg->scan_nodes);
/*
- * We call this when we hit limit, not when pages are added to LRU.
- * No LRU may hold pages because all pages are UNEVICTABLE or
- * memcg is too small and all pages are not on LRU. In that case,
- * we use curret node.
+ * mem_cgroup_may_update_nodemask might have seen no reclaimmable pages
+ * last time it really checked all the LRUs due to rate limiting.
+ * Fallback to the current node in that case for simplicity.
*/
if (unlikely(node == MAX_NUMNODES))
node = numa_node_id();
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx are
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe mm-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
