Re: inux-next: Tree for Apr 27 (uml + mm/memcontrol.c)

[Andrew Morton]

On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:14:52 -0700 (PDT)
David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > Minor matter: that's non-responsive to my suggestion.
> > 
> 
> If it's moved to a new cgroup then we can just go back to the original 
> point that I made as was trying to avoid: adding #ifdefs all over 
> mm/memcontrol.c in a dozen or so places.  A mm/hugetlbcg.c would only be 
> built, natually, when we have "depends on HUGETLB_PAGE" and 
> linux/hugetlb.h takes care of the rest (setting HUGE_MAX_HSTATE for archs 
> that don't define it themselves, in other words only one hugepage size).

And if it isn't moved to a new cgroup then your
memcg-add-hugetlb-extension-fix.patch is suboptimal.  Why is this so
hard?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/