[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230726025711.GI955071@google.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2023 11:57:11 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
To: Andrew Yang <andrew.yang@...iatek.com>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
wsd_upstream@...iatek.com, casper.li@...iatek.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zsmalloc: Fix races between modifications of fullness
and isolated
On (23/07/26 11:31), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (23/07/21 14:37), Andrew Yang wrote:
> >
> > Since fullness and isolated share the same unsigned int,
> > modifications of them should be protected by the same lock.
>
> Sorry, I don't think I follow. Can you please elaborate?
> What is fullness in this context?
Oh, my bad, so that's zspage's fullness:FULLNESS_BITS and
isolated:ISOLATED_BITS. I somehow thought about something
very different (page isolated, not zspage isolated).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists