[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191007162330.GA26503@pc636>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 18:23:30 +0200
From: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: vmalloc: Use the vmap_area_lock to protect
ne_fit_preload_node
Hello, Daniel, Sebastian.
> > On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 06:30:42PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > > On 2019-10-04 18:20:41 [+0200], Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > > > If we have migrate_disable/enable, then, i think preempt_enable/disable
> > > > should be replaced by it and not the way how it has been proposed
> > > > in the patch.
> > >
> > > I don't think this patch is appropriate for upstream.
> >
> > Yes, I agree. The discussion made this clear, this is only for -rt
> > trees. Initially I though this should be in mainline too.
>
> Sorry, this was _before_ Uladzislau pointed out that you *just* moved
> the lock that was there from the beginning. I missed that while looking
> over the patch. Based on that I don't think that this patch is not
> appropriate for upstream.
>
Yes that is a bit messy :) Then i do not see what that patch fixes in
mainline? Instead it will just add an extra blocking, i did not want that
therefore used preempt_enable/disable. But, when i saw this patch i got it
as a preparation of PREEMPT_RT merging work.
--
Vlad Rezki
Powered by blists - more mailing lists