On (19/12/04 14:11), Colin King wrote:
[..]
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/meson/vdec/vdec.c
> b/drivers/staging/media/meson/vdec/vdec.c
> index 0a1a04fd5d13..8dd1396909d7 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/media/meson/vdec/vdec.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/meson/vdec/vdec.c
> @@ -133,6 +133,
On (09/18/19 10:26), 'Greg KH' wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 03:33:04PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > On (09/18/19 08:16), 'Greg KH' wrote:
> > [..]
> > > > Note, that Samsung is still improving sdfat driver. For instance,
> > > &
On (09/18/19 08:16), 'Greg KH' wrote:
[..]
> > Note, that Samsung is still improving sdfat driver. For instance,
> > what will be realeased soon is sdfat v2.3.0, which will include support
> > for "UtcOffset" of "File Directory Entry", in order to satisfy
> > exFAT specification 7.4.
>
[..]
> If Sa
On (04/10/19 13:17), Alastair D'Silva wrote:
> With the wider display format, it can become hard to identify how many
> bytes into the line you are looking at.
>
> The patch adds new flags to hex_dump_to_buffer() and print_hex_dump() to
> print vertical lines to separate every N groups of bytes.
>
cpu_to_le16() is capable enough to detect __builtin_constant_p()
and to use an appropriate compile time ___constant_swahbXX()
function.
So we can use cpu_to_le16() instead of __constant_cpu_to_le16().
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky
---
v1-v4: tweaked the commit message (dropped 'ti
On (03/17/19 16:35), Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 12:20:14AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > cpu_to_le16() is capable enough to detect __builtin_constant_p()
> > and to use an appropriate compile time ___constant_swahbXX()
> > function.
&
cpu_to_le16() is capable enough to detect __builtin_constant_p()
and to use an appropriate compile time ___constant_swahbXX()
function.
So we can use cpu_to_le16() instead of __constant_cpu_to_le16().
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky
---
drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/include/wifi.h | 4 ++--
1
On (03/17/19 13:16), Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 08:48:03PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > From: Sergey Senozhatsky
>
> Why ".work"?
Aha, good question. There is not so much of a difference between .work and
!.work. (if any at all).
>
From: Sergey Senozhatsky
cpu_to_le16() is capable enough to detect __builtin_constant_p()
and to use an appropriate compile time ___constant_swahbXX()
function.
So we can use cpu_to_le16() instead of __constant_cpu_to_le16().
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky
---
drivers/staging/rtl8723bs
On (03/17/19 12:28), Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 05:31:55PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > A trivial patch.
>
> No need to put this in the changelog text at all.
>
> Please fix up and resend.
OK.
-ss
A trivial patch.
cpu_to_le16() is capable enough to detect __builtin_constant_p()
and to use an appropriate compile time ___constant_swahbXX()
function.
So we can use cpu_to_le16() instead of __constant_cpu_to_le16().
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky
---
drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/include
On (06/22/16 11:27), Ganesh Mahendran wrote:
[..]
> > > Signed-off-by: Ganesh Mahendran
> > > ---
> > > drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c | 12
> > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c
> > > b/d
On (08/06/15 01:24), Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 07:19:01PM +0100, Salah Triki wrote:
> > @@ -508,14 +509,15 @@ static struct zram_meta *zram_meta_alloc(int
> > device_id, u64 disksize)
> > num_pages = disksize >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > meta->table = vzalloc(num_pages * sizeof(
> > I read your threads roughly so I may miss something. If so, sorry
> > > for that. Anyway I will put my opinion.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 02:12:50AM +0300, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > > Dan Carpenter noted that handle_pending_slot_free(
yway I will put my opinion.
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 02:12:50AM +0300, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > Dan Carpenter noted that handle_pending_slot_free() is racy with
> > zram_reset_device(). Take write init_lock in zram_slot_free(), thus
>
> Right but "init_lock&quo
On (09/12/13 15:12), Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 02:12:50AM +0300, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > Dan Carpenter noted that handle_pending_slot_free() is racy with
> > zram_reset_device(). Take write init_lock in zram_slot_free(), thus
> > preventing any conc
: protect handle_pending_slot_free() with zram rw_lock.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky
---
drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c | 9 +
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c b/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
index 91d94b5..a8261b4
`zram->init_done' in fact mimics `zram->meta != NULL' value.
Introduce init_done() function that checks zram->meta (iow,
checks if initialisation was performed), so `zram->init_done'
can be removed.
v3: init_done() in handle_pending_slot_free()
v2: introduce init_do
On (09/10/13 17:34), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
[..]
> >
> > Now I think we can drop the call to handle_pending_slot_free() in
> > zram_bvec_rw() altogether. As long as the write lock is held when
> > handle_pending_slot_free() is called, there is no race. It's no
ned-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky
---
drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c | 13 +
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c b/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
index 91d94b5..7a2d4de 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
+++ b/driv
On (09/09/13 18:10), Jerome Marchand wrote:
> On 09/09/2013 03:46 PM, Jerome Marchand wrote:
> > On 09/09/2013 03:21 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> >> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 03:49:42PM +0300, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> >>>>> Calling handle_pending_slot_free() for
On (09/09/13 17:52), Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 05:42:59PM +0300, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > 3) Explain why it is safe to test zram->slot_free_rq when we are not
> > >holding the lock. I think it is unsafe. I don't want to even think
On (09/09/13 16:21), Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 03:49:42PM +0300, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > > Calling handle_pending_slot_free() for every RW operation may
> > > > cause unneccessary slot_free_lock locking, because most likely
> > >
> > Calling handle_pending_slot_free() for every RW operation may
> > cause unneccessary slot_free_lock locking, because most likely
> > process will see NULL slot_free_rq. handle_pending_slot_free()
> > only when current detects that slot_free_rq is not NULL.
> >
> > v2: protect handle_pending_sl
On (09/09/13 11:33), Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 05:55:45PM +0300, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > On (09/06/13 16:42), Jerome Marchand wrote:
> > > On 09/06/2013 03:47 PM, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > > Calling handle_pending_slot_fre
rw_lock.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky
---
drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c | 7 +--
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c b/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
index 91d94b5..5bfbe0e 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
+++ b
`zram->init_done' in fact mimics `zram->meta != NULL' value. Introduce
init_done() function that checks zram->meta (iow, checks if initialisation
was performed), so `zram->init_done' can be removed.
v2: introduce init_done()
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky
On (09/06/13 16:50), Jerome Marchand wrote:
> On 09/06/2013 03:52 PM, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > `zram->init_done != 0' equals to `zram->meta != NULL', so init_done
> > can be removed.
>
> The name init_done is self explanatory, meta isn't. You cou
On (09/06/13 16:42), Jerome Marchand wrote:
> On 09/06/2013 03:47 PM, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > Calling handle_pending_slot_free() for every RW operation may
> > cause unneccessary slot_free_lock locking, because most likely
> > process will see NULL slot_free_rq. han
`zram->init_done != 0' equals to `zram->meta != NULL', so init_done
can be removed.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky
---
drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c | 18 +++---
drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.h | 1 -
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff
Calling handle_pending_slot_free() for every RW operation may
cause unneccessary slot_free_lock locking, because most likely
process will see NULL slot_free_rq. handle_pending_slot_free()
only when current detects that slot_free_rq is not NULL.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky
---
drivers
On (08/23/13 09:48), Greg KH wrote:
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] LMK: Optimize lowmem_shrink
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
>
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 09:41:05AM +0800, Leon Ma wrote:
> > From: Leon Ma
> > Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:22:38 +0800
> > Subject: [PATCH] LMK: Optimize lowmem_shrink.
On (08/07/13 20:40), Paul McQuade wrote:
> __func__ replaces __Function__.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul McQuade
> ---
> drivers/staging/bcm/DDRInit.c | 75
> -
> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/bcm/DDRInit.
= 384181.66 KB/sec
w/ patch (LZO)
Children see throughput for 8 mixed workload= 2957859.84 KB/sec
Parent sees throughput for 8 mixed workload = 1859763.07 KB/sec
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky
---
drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c | 604 +++
34 matches
Mail list logo
