Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm, highmem: remove useless pool_lock

2012-10-31 Thread JoonSoo Kim
Hello, Andrew. 2012/10/31 Andrew Morton : > On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:12:53 +0900 > Joonsoo Kim wrote: > >> The pool_lock protects the page_address_pool from concurrent access. >> But, access to the page_address_pool is already protected by kmap_lock. >> So remove it. > > Well, there's a

Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm, highmem: remove useless pool_lock

2012-10-31 Thread JoonSoo Kim
Hello, Andrew. 2012/10/31 Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org: On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:12:53 +0900 Joonsoo Kim js1...@gmail.com wrote: The pool_lock protects the page_address_pool from concurrent access. But, access to the page_address_pool is already protected by kmap_lock. So remove

Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm, highmem: remove useless pool_lock

2012-10-30 Thread Minchan Kim
Hi Andrew, On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 02:31:07PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:12:53 +0900 > Joonsoo Kim wrote: > > > The pool_lock protects the page_address_pool from concurrent access. > > But, access to the page_address_pool is already protected by kmap_lock. > > So

Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm, highmem: remove useless pool_lock

2012-10-30 Thread Andrew Morton
On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:12:53 +0900 Joonsoo Kim wrote: > The pool_lock protects the page_address_pool from concurrent access. > But, access to the page_address_pool is already protected by kmap_lock. > So remove it. Well, there's a set_page_address() call in mm/page_alloc.c which doesn't have

Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm, highmem: remove useless pool_lock

2012-10-30 Thread Andrew Morton
On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:12:53 +0900 Joonsoo Kim js1...@gmail.com wrote: The pool_lock protects the page_address_pool from concurrent access. But, access to the page_address_pool is already protected by kmap_lock. So remove it. Well, there's a set_page_address() call in mm/page_alloc.c which

Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm, highmem: remove useless pool_lock

2012-10-30 Thread Minchan Kim
Hi Andrew, On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 02:31:07PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:12:53 +0900 Joonsoo Kim js1...@gmail.com wrote: The pool_lock protects the page_address_pool from concurrent access. But, access to the page_address_pool is already protected by kmap_lock.

Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm, highmem: remove useless pool_lock

2012-10-28 Thread Minchan Kim
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 04:12:53AM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > The pool_lock protects the page_address_pool from concurrent access. > But, access to the page_address_pool is already protected by kmap_lock. > So remove it. > > Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim Reviewed-by: Minchan Kin Looks good to

[PATCH 2/5] mm, highmem: remove useless pool_lock

2012-10-28 Thread Joonsoo Kim
The pool_lock protects the page_address_pool from concurrent access. But, access to the page_address_pool is already protected by kmap_lock. So remove it. Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim diff --git a/mm/highmem.c b/mm/highmem.c index b3b3d68..017bad1 100644 --- a/mm/highmem.c +++ b/mm/highmem.c @@

[PATCH 2/5] mm, highmem: remove useless pool_lock

2012-10-28 Thread Joonsoo Kim
The pool_lock protects the page_address_pool from concurrent access. But, access to the page_address_pool is already protected by kmap_lock. So remove it. Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim js1...@gmail.com diff --git a/mm/highmem.c b/mm/highmem.c index b3b3d68..017bad1 100644 --- a/mm/highmem.c +++

Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm, highmem: remove useless pool_lock

2012-10-28 Thread Minchan Kim
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 04:12:53AM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote: The pool_lock protects the page_address_pool from concurrent access. But, access to the page_address_pool is already protected by kmap_lock. So remove it. Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim js1...@gmail.com Reviewed-by: Minchan Kin