Re: [PATCH] mm/memcg: replace inexistence move_lock_page_cgroup() by move_lock_mem_cgroup() in comment

[Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>]

(2012/07/05 15:28), Wanpeng Li wrote:
> From: Wanpeng Li <liwp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <liwp.linux@gmail.com>

Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>


> ---
>   mm/memcontrol.c |    4 ++--
>   1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 3d318f6..63e36e7 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -1899,7 +1899,7 @@ again:
>   		return;
>   	/*
>   	 * If this memory cgroup is not under account moving, we don't
> -	 * need to take move_lock_page_cgroup(). Because we already hold
> +	 * need to take move_lock_mem_cgroup(). Because we already hold
>   	 * rcu_read_lock(), any calls to move_account will be delayed until
>   	 * rcu_read_unlock() if mem_cgroup_stolen() == true.
>   	 */
> @@ -1921,7 +1921,7 @@ void __mem_cgroup_end_update_page_stat(struct page *page, unsigned long *flags)
>   	/*
>   	 * It's guaranteed that pc->mem_cgroup never changes while
>   	 * lock is held because a routine modifies pc->mem_cgroup
> -	 * should take move_lock_page_cgroup().
> +	 * should take move_lock_mem_cgroup().
>   	 */
>   	move_unlock_mem_cgroup(pc->mem_cgroup, flags);
>   }
>