[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200123022305.GF249784@google.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 18:23:05 -0800
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
To: Yue Hu <zbestahu@...il.com>
Cc: ngupta@...are.org, sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, huyue2@...ong.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zram: do not set ZRAM_IDLE bit for idlepage writeback in
writeback_store()
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 07:35:57PM +0800, Yue Hu wrote:
> From: Yue Hu <huyue2@...ong.com>
>
> Currently, we will call zram_set_flag() to set ZRAM_IDLE bit even for
> idlepage writeback. That is pointless. Let's set it only for hugepage mode.
Could you be more specific? What do you see the problem with that?
>
> Signed-off-by: Yue Hu <huyue2@...ong.com>
> ---
> drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c | 12 +++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> index 4285e75..eef5767 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> @@ -689,16 +689,18 @@ static ssize_t writeback_store(struct device *dev,
> if (mode == IDLE_WRITEBACK &&
> !zram_test_flag(zram, index, ZRAM_IDLE))
> goto next;
> - if (mode == HUGE_WRITEBACK &&
> - !zram_test_flag(zram, index, ZRAM_HUGE))
> - goto next;
> + if (mode == HUGE_WRITEBACK) {
> + if (!zram_test_flag(zram, index, ZRAM_HUGE))
> + goto next;
> + /* Need for hugepage writeback racing */
> + zram_set_flag(zram, index, ZRAM_IDLE);
> + }
> +
> /*
> * Clearing ZRAM_UNDER_WB is duty of caller.
> * IOW, zram_free_page never clear it.
> */
> zram_set_flag(zram, index, ZRAM_UNDER_WB);
> - /* Need for hugepage writeback racing */
> - zram_set_flag(zram, index, ZRAM_IDLE);
> zram_slot_unlock(zram, index);
> if (zram_bvec_read(zram, &bvec, index, 0, NULL)) {
> zram_slot_lock(zram, index);
> --
> 1.9.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists