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