On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 11:18:51AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (04/03/17 14:17), Minchan Kim wrote:
> > With this clean-up phase, I want to use zram's wrapper function
> > to lock table access which is more consistent with other zram's
> > functions.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim
>
On (04/03/17 14:17), Minchan Kim wrote:
> With this clean-up phase, I want to use zram's wrapper function
> to lock table access which is more consistent with other zram's
> functions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim
Reviewed-by: Sergey Senozhatsky
-ss
On (04/03/17 15:34), Minchan Kim wrote:
[..]
> > c) spin_locks probably have better fairness guarantees
>
> In fact, it wouldn't be an imporant because zram's slot lock contention
> is not heavy.
mostly agree. I think (and I may be mistaken) direct IO
causes contention; but direct IO is probably
Hi Sergey,
On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 03:08:58PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> Hello Minchan,
>
> On (04/03/17 14:17), Minchan Kim wrote:
> > With this clean-up phase, I want to use zram's wrapper function
> > to lock table access which is more consistent with other zram's
> > functions.
>
> w
Hello Minchan,
On (04/03/17 14:17), Minchan Kim wrote:
> With this clean-up phase, I want to use zram's wrapper function
> to lock table access which is more consistent with other zram's
> functions.
which reminds me of...
there was a discussion a long time ago, -rt people absolutely
hate bit sp
With this clean-up phase, I want to use zram's wrapper function
to lock table access which is more consistent with other zram's
functions.
Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim
---
drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c | 42 --
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 14 deletions(
6 matches
Mail list logo