From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756949AbaC0O5t (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Mar 2014 10:57:49 -0400 Received: from mail-qa0-f45.google.com ([209.85.216.45]:59579 "EHLO mail-qa0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755794AbaC0O5r (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Mar 2014 10:57:47 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 10:57:43 -0400 From: Tejun Heo To: Jianyu Zhan Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, cl@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm/percpu.c: renew the max_contig if we merge the head and previous block. Message-ID: <20140327145743.GC18503@htj.dyndns.org> References: <1395918343-6775-1-git-send-email-nasa4836@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1395918343-6775-1-git-send-email-nasa4836@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 07:05:43PM +0800, Jianyu Zhan wrote: > During pcpu_alloc_area(), we might merge the current head with the > previous block. Since we have calculated the max_contig using the > size of previous block before we skip it, and now we update the size > of previous block, so we should renew the max_contig. pcpu_alloc_area() has been reimplemented in percpu/for-3.15. Can you please refresh the patch against the new implementation? Thanks. -- tejun