[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e7ur36nfcppqqwqe4lgebb3prjk3lr7hlh5fks22ahsqz3bfyk@si6lxz5mqsqe>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2025 16:02:00 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, Brian Geffon <bgeffon@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zram: drop pp_in_progress
On (25/12/16 15:22), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> pp_in_progress makes sure that only one post-processing
> (writeback or recomrpession) is active at any given time.
> Functionality wise it, basically, shadows zram init_lock,
> when init_lock is acquired in writer mode.
>
> Switch recompress_store() and writeback_store() to take
> zram init_lock in writer mode, like all store() sysfs
> handlers should do, so that we can drop pp_in_progress.
> Recompression and writeback can be somewhat slow, so
> holding init_lock in writer mode can block zram attrs
> reads, but in reality the only zram attrs reads that
> take place are mm_stat reads, and usually it's the same
> process that reads mm_stat and does recompression or
> writeback.
>
> Suggested-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
Please disregard this one, there will be a follow-up patch.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists