Re: inux-next: Tree for Apr 27 (uml + mm/memcontrol.c)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: 2012-04-27 23:25:04
Also in:
lkml
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: 2012-04-27 23:25:04
Also in:
lkml
On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:14:52 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
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?