The patch titled
Subject: mm/memcg: replace inexistence move_lock_page_cgroup() by move_lock_mem_cgroup() in comment
has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was
mm-memcg-replace-inexistence-move_lock_page_cgroup-by-move_lock_mem_cgroup-in-comment.patch
This patch was dropped because it was merged into mainline or a subsystem tree
------------------------------------------------------
From: Wanpeng Li <liwp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: mm/memcg: replace inexistence move_lock_page_cgroup() by move_lock_mem_cgroup() in comment
Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <liwp.linux@xxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff -puN mm/memcontrol.c~mm-memcg-replace-inexistence-move_lock_page_cgroup-by-move_lock_mem_cgroup-in-comment mm/memcontrol.c
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c~mm-memcg-replace-inexistence-move_lock_page_cgroup-by-move_lock_mem_cgroup-in-comment
+++ a/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -1898,7 +1898,7 @@ again:
return;
/*
* If this memory cgroup is not under account moving, we don't
- * need to take move_lock_page_cgroup(). Because we already hold
+ * need to take move_lock_mem_cgroup(). Because we already hold
* rcu_read_lock(), any calls to move_account will be delayed until
* rcu_read_unlock() if mem_cgroup_stolen() == true.
*/
@@ -1920,7 +1920,7 @@ void __mem_cgroup_end_update_page_stat(s
/*
* It's guaranteed that pc->mem_cgroup never changes while
* lock is held because a routine modifies pc->mem_cgroup
- * should take move_lock_page_cgroup().
+ * should take move_lock_mem_cgroup().
*/
move_unlock_mem_cgroup(pc->mem_cgroup, flags);
}
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from liwp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx are
origin.patch
linux-next.patch
--
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
