[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140612075638.GD20199@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 16:56:38 +0900
From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>, Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/10] mm, cma: use spinlock instead of mutex
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 04:40:29PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:21:47PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > Currently, we should take the mutex for manipulating bitmap.
> > This job may be really simple and short so we don't need to sleep
> > if contended. So I change it to spinlock.
>
> I'm not sure it would be good always.
> Maybe you remember we discussed about similar stuff about bitmap
> searching in vmap friend internally, which was really painful
> when it was fragmented. So, at least we need number if you really want
> and I hope the number from ARM machine most popular platform for CMA
> at the moment.
Good Point!! Agreed. I will drop this one in next spin and re-submit
in separate patchset after some testing.
Thanks.
--
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