[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9bd908b65ef15149458aa060c0daf065f9d45615.camel@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2020 16:41:48 +0100
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Vitaly Wool <vitaly.wool@...sulko.com>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: scheduling while atomic in z3fold
On Mon, 2020-12-07 at 16:21 +0100, Vitaly Wool wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 1:34 PM Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> wrote:
> >
>
> > Unfortunately, that made zero difference.
>
> Okay, I suggest that you submit the patch that changes read_lock() to
> write_lock() in __release_z3fold_page() and I'll ack it then.
> I would like to rewrite the code so that write_lock is not necessary
> there but I don't want to hold you back and it isn't likely that I'll
> complete this today.
Nah, I'm in no rush... especially not to sign off on "Because the
little voices in my head said this bit should look like that bit over
yonder, and testing _seems_ to indicate they're right about that" :)
-Mike
Powered by blists - more mailing lists