On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 03:37:46PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 04:11:28PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 09:51:34PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > If we need to iterate the list efficiently, i'd suggest getting rid of
> > > the list and usi
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 04:11:28PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 09:51:34PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > If we need to iterate the list efficiently, i'd suggest getting rid of
> > the list and using an xarray instead. maybe a maple tree, once that code
> > is better
On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 09:51:34PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 07:39:36PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 01:08:43PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> > > When multiple locks are acquired, they should be released in reverse
> > > order. For s_start()
On 12/14/20 4:39 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 13.12.20 19:08, Waiman Long wrote:
When multiple locks are acquired, they should be released in reverse
order. For s_start() and s_stop() in mm/vmalloc.c, that is not the
case.
s_start: mutex_lock(&vmap_purge_lock); spin_lock(&vmap_area_lock);
On 13.12.20 19:08, Waiman Long wrote:
> When multiple locks are acquired, they should be released in reverse
> order. For s_start() and s_stop() in mm/vmalloc.c, that is not the
> case.
>
> s_start: mutex_lock(&vmap_purge_lock); spin_lock(&vmap_area_lock);
> s_stop : mutex_unlock(&vmap_purge_l
On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 07:39:36PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 01:08:43PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> > When multiple locks are acquired, they should be released in reverse
> > order. For s_start() and s_stop() in mm/vmalloc.c, that is not the
> > case.
> >
> > s_sta
On 12/13/20 1:39 PM, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 01:08:43PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
When multiple locks are acquired, they should be released in reverse
order. For s_start() and s_stop() in mm/vmalloc.c, that is not the
case.
s_start: mutex_lock(&vmap_purge_lock); spin_
On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 01:08:43PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> When multiple locks are acquired, they should be released in reverse
> order. For s_start() and s_stop() in mm/vmalloc.c, that is not the
> case.
>
> s_start: mutex_lock(&vmap_purge_lock); spin_lock(&vmap_area_lock);
> s_stop : mut
When multiple locks are acquired, they should be released in reverse
order. For s_start() and s_stop() in mm/vmalloc.c, that is not the
case.
s_start: mutex_lock(&vmap_purge_lock); spin_lock(&vmap_area_lock);
s_stop : mutex_unlock(&vmap_purge_lock); spin_unlock(&vmap_area_lock);
This unlock s
9 matches
Mail list logo