On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 23:37:50 +0100 Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 02/02/2016 11:21 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 22:53:36 +0100 Christian Borntraeger > > <borntrae...@de.ibm.com> wrote: > > > >>>> I don't think we should have a CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC that does some > >>>> stuff > >>>> and then a commandline parameter or > >>>> CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC_ENABLE_DEFAULT > >>>> to enable more stuff. It should either be all enabled by the > >>>> commandline > >>>> (or config option) or split into a separate entity. > >>>> CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC_LIGHT and CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC would be fine, > >>>> but > >>>> the current state is very confusing about what is being done and what > >>>> isn't. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Ping? > >>> > >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/1/29/266 > > > > That's already in linux-next so I can't apply it. > > > > Well, I can, but it's a hassle. What's happening here? > > I pushed it on my tree for kbuild testing purposes some days ago. > Will drop so that it can go via mm. There are other patches that I haven't merged because they were already in -next. In fact I think I dropped them because they later popped up in -next. Some or all of: lib-spinlock_debugc-prevent-an-infinite-recursive-cycle-in-spin_dump.patch mm-provide-debug_pagealloc_enabled-without-config_debug_pagealloc.patch x86-query-dynamic-debug_pagealloc-setting.patch s390-query-dynamic-debug_pagealloc-setting.patch mm-provide-debug_pagealloc_enabled-without-config_debug_pagealloc.patch x86-query-dynamic-debug_pagealloc-setting.patch s390-query-dynamic-debug_pagealloc-setting.patch So please resend everything which you think is needed. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
