On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 07:36:50PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 01:29:16PM -0500, Dennis Zhou wrote:
> > > I've noticed while reading the code, why do you use the indirect call
> > > here? The wsm.ops points to btrfs_zstd_compress so free_workspace is
> > > always zstd_free_
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 01:29:16PM -0500, Dennis Zhou wrote:
> > I've noticed while reading the code, why do you use the indirect call
> > here? The wsm.ops points to btrfs_zstd_compress so free_workspace is
> > always zstd_free_workspace.
> >
> > The compiler is usually smart to replace such thin
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 05:44:41PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 02:53:48PM -0500, Dennis Zhou wrote:
> > The timer function, zstd_reclaim_timer_fn(), reschedules itself under
> > certain conditions. When cleaning up, take the lock and remove all
> > workspaces. This prevents
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 02:53:48PM -0500, Dennis Zhou wrote:
> The timer function, zstd_reclaim_timer_fn(), reschedules itself under
> certain conditions. When cleaning up, take the lock and remove all
> workspaces. This prevents the timer from rearming itself. Lastly, switch
> to del_timer_sync()
The timer function, zstd_reclaim_timer_fn(), reschedules itself under
certain conditions. When cleaning up, take the lock and remove all
workspaces. This prevents the timer from rearming itself. Lastly, switch
to del_timer_sync() to ensure that the timer function can't trigger as
we're unloading.
