Re: [PATCH 0/8] THP support for Sparc64

[David Miller]

From: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 12:35:48 +0200

> Hi Dave,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 10:00:27PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 15:55:44 -0700
>> 
>> > I had a shot at integrating all this onto the pending stuff in linux-next. 
>> > "mm: Add and use update_mmu_cache_pmd() in transparent huge page code."
>> > needed minor massaging in huge_memory.c.  But as Andrea mentioned, we
>> > ran aground on Gerald's
>> > http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/thp-remove-assumptions-on-pgtable_t-type.patch,
>> > part of the thp-for-s390 work.
>> 
>> While working on a rebase relative to this work, I noticed that the
>> s390 patches don't even compile.
>> 
>> It's because of that pmd_pgprot() change from Peter Z. which arrives
>> asynchonously via the linux-next tree.  It makes THP start using
>> pmd_pgprot() (a new interface) which the s390 patches don't provide.
> 
> My suggestion would be to ignore linux-next and port it to -mm only
> and re-send to Andrew. schednuma is by mistake in linux-next, and
> it's not going to get merged as far as I can tell.

Sorry Andrea, that simply is impractical.

The first thing Andrew's patch series does is include linux-next,
therefore every THP and MM patch in his series is against linux-next.

So there are already dependencies in there on the pmd_pgprot() bits
and I already did the implementation for sparc64 so that's what I'm
submitting against.
--
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/