Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
kernel/cgroup.c
between commit:
d98817d4961b ("cgroup: don't print subsystems for the default hierarchy")
3e1d2eed39d8 ("cgroup: introduce cgroup_subsys->legacy_name")
from the cgroup tree and commit:
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
kernel/cgroup.c
between commit:
d98817d4961b (cgroup: don't print subsystems for the default hierarchy)
3e1d2eed39d8 (cgroup: introduce cgroup_subsys-legacy_name)
from the cgroup tree and commit:
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
mm/memcontrol.c between commit 6770c64e5c8d ("cgroup: replace
cftype->trigger() with cftype->write()") from the cgroup tree and
commits 15aa061d2994 ("memcg: deprecate memory.force_empty knob") and
2423e4fd8967
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
mm/memcontrol.c between commit 6770c64e5c8d (cgroup: replace
cftype-trigger() with cftype-write()) from the cgroup tree and
commits 15aa061d2994 (memcg: deprecate memory.force_empty knob) and
2423e4fd8967
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
mm/memcontrol.c between commits e61734c55c24 ("cgroup: remove
cgroup->name") from the cgroup tree and commits a89db06ab1b4 ("memcg:
change oom_info_lock to mutex") and c78e84121972 ("memcg, slab: cleanup
memcg cache
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
mm/memcontrol.c between commits e61734c55c24 (cgroup: remove
cgroup-name) from the cgroup tree and commits a89db06ab1b4 (memcg:
change oom_info_lock to mutex) and c78e84121972 (memcg, slab: cleanup
memcg cache
On Fri 14-02-14 09:33:45, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> I do not see spin_unlock -> mutex_unlock at the very end of this function.
Scratch that. That part apparently didn't conflict so it wasn't in the
merge commit. Sorry about the noise
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list:
On Fri 14-02-14 15:34:14, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
[...]
> diff --cc mm/memcontrol.c
> index d9c6ac1532e6,de1a2aed4954..
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@@ -1683,25 -1683,54 +1683,25 @@@ static void move_unlock_mem_cgroup(stru
>*/
> void
On Fri 14-02-14 15:34:14, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
[...]
diff --cc mm/memcontrol.c
index d9c6ac1532e6,de1a2aed4954..
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@@ -1683,25 -1683,54 +1683,25 @@@ static void move_unlock_mem_cgroup(stru
*/
void
On Fri 14-02-14 09:33:45, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
I do not see spin_unlock - mutex_unlock at the very end of this function.
Scratch that. That part apparently didn't conflict so it wasn't in the
merge commit. Sorry about the noise
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list:
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
mm/memcontrol.c between commit e61734c55c24 ("cgroup: remove
cgroup->name") from the cgroup tree and commit 05d3a02a1a0d ("memcg:
change oom_info_lock to mutex") from the akpm-current tree.
I fixed it up (see below)
[Just adding Tejun]
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 15:25:57 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
> kernel/cpuset.c between commit d66393e54e0a ("cpuset: use
> css_task_iter_start/next/end() instead of css_scan_tasks()") from
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
kernel/cpuset.c between commit d66393e54e0a ("cpuset: use
css_task_iter_start/next/end() instead of css_scan_tasks()") from the
cgroup tree and commit a82211b06d6e ("cpusets: allocate heap only when
required") from the
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
kernel/cpuset.c between commit d66393e54e0a (cpuset: use
css_task_iter_start/next/end() instead of css_scan_tasks()) from the
cgroup tree and commit a82211b06d6e (cpusets: allocate heap only when
required) from the
[Just adding Tejun]
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 15:25:57 +1100 Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au
wrote:
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
kernel/cpuset.c between commit d66393e54e0a (cpuset: use
css_task_iter_start/next/end() instead of
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
mm/memcontrol.c between commit e61734c55c24 (cgroup: remove
cgroup-name) from the cgroup tree and commit 05d3a02a1a0d (memcg:
change oom_info_lock to mutex) from the akpm-current tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
mm/memcontrol.c between commit b86278359484 ("memcg: stop using css id")
from the cgroup tree and commit 4c34cae8f277 ("revert "memcg: get rid of
soft-limit tree infrastructure"") from the akpm-current tree.
I fixed
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
mm/memcontrol.c between commit b86278359484 (memcg: stop using css id)
from the cgroup tree and commit 4c34cae8f277 (revert memcg: get rid of
soft-limit tree infrastructure) from the akpm-current tree.
I fixed it up
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
mm/memcontrol.c between commits from the cgroup tree and commits from the
akpm-current tree.
I fixed it up (using Michal's email as a guide - see below) and can carry
the fix as necessary (no action is required).
--
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in
mm/memcontrol.c between commits from the cgroup tree and commits from the
akpm-current tree.
I fixed it up (using Michal's email as a guide - see below) and can carry
the fix as necessary (no action is required).
--
20 matches
Mail list logo
