hello,
On (02/04/15 00:39), Minchan Kim wrote:
> So, you mean this?
>
> reset_store
>
> down_write(>init_lock);
> zram_reset_device(zram);
> set_capacity(zram->disk, 0);
> up_write(>init_lock);
>
>
> If so, +1.
> Hope you send a squash patch to Andrew.
yes, that's
Hello,
On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 12:06:24AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (02/03/15 23:52), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > On (02/03/15 23:15), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > > How about keep this here? Protected by zram->init_lock.
> > > >set_capacity(zram->disk, 0);
> > >
> >
On (02/03/15 23:52), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (02/03/15 23:15), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > How about keep this here? Protected by zram->init_lock.
> > >set_capacity(zram->disk, 0);
> >
> > why?
> >
> yeah, I see why. good catch.
>
> hm, why do we perform destroy_device()
On (02/03/15 23:15), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > How about keep this here? Protected by zram->init_lock.
> >set_capacity(zram->disk, 0);
>
> why?
>
yeah, I see why. good catch.
hm, why do we perform destroy_device() before zram_reset_device() in
zram_exit()?
how about doing
Hello,
On (02/03/15 22:05), Ganesh Mahendran wrote:
> > zram->disksize = 0;
> > - if (reset_capacity)
> > - set_capacity(zram->disk, 0);
>
> How about keep this here? Protected by zram->init_lock.
>set_capacity(zram->disk, 0);
why?
-ss
--
To
Hello, Sergey
2015-02-02 22:08 GMT+08:00 Sergey Senozhatsky :
> Ganesh Mahendran was the first one who proposed to use bdev->bd_mutex
> to avoid ->bd_holders race condition:
>
> CPU0CPU1
> umount /* zram->init_done is true */
> reset_store()
> bdev->bd_holders
On (02/03/15 23:15), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
How about keep this here? Protected by zram-init_lock.
set_capacity(zram-disk, 0);
why?
yeah, I see why. good catch.
hm, why do we perform destroy_device() before zram_reset_device() in
zram_exit()?
how about doing something like
Hello,
On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 12:06:24AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
On (02/03/15 23:52), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
On (02/03/15 23:15), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
How about keep this here? Protected by zram-init_lock.
set_capacity(zram-disk, 0);
why?
yeah,
On (02/03/15 23:52), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
On (02/03/15 23:15), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
How about keep this here? Protected by zram-init_lock.
set_capacity(zram-disk, 0);
why?
yeah, I see why. good catch.
hm, why do we perform destroy_device() before
hello,
On (02/04/15 00:39), Minchan Kim wrote:
So, you mean this?
reset_store
down_write(zram-init_lock);
zram_reset_device(zram);
set_capacity(zram-disk, 0);
up_write(zram-init_lock);
If so, +1.
Hope you send a squash patch to Andrew.
yes, that's what I
Hello, Sergey
2015-02-02 22:08 GMT+08:00 Sergey Senozhatsky sergey.senozhat...@gmail.com:
Ganesh Mahendran was the first one who proposed to use bdev-bd_mutex
to avoid -bd_holders race condition:
CPU0CPU1
umount /* zram-init_done is true */
reset_store()
Hello,
On (02/03/15 22:05), Ganesh Mahendran wrote:
zram-disksize = 0;
- if (reset_capacity)
- set_capacity(zram-disk, 0);
How about keep this here? Protected by zram-init_lock.
set_capacity(zram-disk, 0);
why?
-ss
--
To unsubscribe from
Hello Sergey,
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 11:08:40PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> Ganesh Mahendran was the first one who proposed to use bdev->bd_mutex
> to avoid ->bd_holders race condition:
>
> CPU0CPU1
> umount /* zram->init_done is true */
>
Hello Sergey,
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 11:08:40PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
Ganesh Mahendran was the first one who proposed to use bdev-bd_mutex
to avoid -bd_holders race condition:
CPU0CPU1
umount /* zram-init_done is true */
reset_store()
14 matches
Mail list logo