On 09/28/2012 03:29 PM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
Hi, Chen,
On 09/27/2012 09:19 PM, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
On 09/27/2012 02:47 PM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
The __add_zone() maybe call sleep-able init_currently_empty_zone()
to init wait_table,
But this function also modifies the zone_start_pfn without any
Hi, Chen,
On 09/27/2012 09:19 PM, Ni zhan Chen wrote:
> On 09/27/2012 02:47 PM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> The __add_zone() maybe call sleep-able init_currently_empty_zone()
>> to init wait_table,
>>
>> But this function also modifies the zone_start_pfn without any lock.
>> It is bugy.
>>
>> So we mo
Hi, KOSAKI
On 09/28/2012 06:30 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> (9/27/12 2:47 AM), Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> The __add_zone() maybe call sleep-able init_currently_empty_zone()
>> to init wait_table,
>
> This doesn't explain why sleepable is critical important. I think sleepable
> is jsut unrelated. The
(9/27/12 2:47 AM), Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> The __add_zone() maybe call sleep-able init_currently_empty_zone()
> to init wait_table,
This doesn't explain why sleepable is critical important. I think sleepable
is jsut unrelated. The fact is only: to write zone->zone_start_pfn require
zone_span_writel
On 09/27/2012 02:47 PM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
The __add_zone() maybe call sleep-able init_currently_empty_zone()
to init wait_table,
But this function also modifies the zone_start_pfn without any lock.
It is bugy.
So we move this modification out, and we ensure the modification
of zone_start_pfn
The __add_zone() maybe call sleep-able init_currently_empty_zone()
to init wait_table,
But this function also modifies the zone_start_pfn without any lock.
It is bugy.
So we move this modification out, and we ensure the modification
of zone_start_pfn is only done with zone_span_writelock() held o
6 matches
Mail list logo