[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140114071439.GC2322@swordfish>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 10:14:39 +0300
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] zram: fix race between reset and flushing pending
work
On (01/13/14 15:55), Andrew Morton wrote:
[..]
> >
> > --- a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> > @@ -553,14 +553,14 @@ static void zram_reset_device(struct zram *zram, bool reset_capacity)
> > size_t index;
> > struct zram_meta *meta;
> >
> > - flush_work(&zram->free_work);
> > -
> > down_write(&zram->init_lock);
> > if (!zram->init_done) {
> > up_write(&zram->init_lock);
> > return;
> > }
> >
> > + flush_work(&zram->free_work);
> > +
> > meta = zram->meta;
> > zram->init_done = 0;
>
> This makes zram.lock nest inside zram.init_lock, which afaict is new
> behaviour.
>
> That all seems OK and logical - has it been well tested with lockdep?
>
Patches 1-7
Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
-ss
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists