[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cb7527b626904a909d6fdba67bd5235b@hisilicon.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 02:07:53 +0000
From: "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" <song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com>
To: Vitaly Wool <vitaly.wool@...sulko.com>
CC: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
"Mike Galbraith" <efault@....de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
NitinGupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"tiantao (H)" <tiantao6@...ilicon.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] zsmalloc: do not use bit_spin_lock
> I'm still not convinced. Will kmap what, src? At this point src might become just a bogus pointer.
As long as the memory is still there, we can kmap it by its page struct. But if
it is not there anymore, we have no way.
> Why couldn't the object have been moved somewhere else (due to the compaction mechanism for instance)
> at the time DMA kicks in?
So zs_map_object() will guarantee the src won't be moved by holding those preemption-disabled lock?
If so, it seems we have to drop the MOVABLE gfp in zswap for zsmalloc case?
>
> >
> > ~Vitaly
>
Thanks
Barry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists