mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
	kernel-team@lge.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] zram: use zram_slot_lock instead of raw bit_spin_lock op
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 15:08:58 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170403060858.GA17309@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1491196653-7388-4-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org>

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 spin_locks and they suggested us to replace it with
normal spin_locks (and I promised to take a look at it, but
got interrupted and never really returned back to it).

for !lockdep builds the impact is somewhat small; for lockdep
builds we increase the memory usage, but

a) lockdep builds are debug builds by definition, no one runs lockdep
   enabled kernels in production

b) we have lockdep in zram now, which is nice

c) spin_locks probably have better fairness guarantees


what do you think? can we, in this patch set, also replce bit
spin_locks with a normal spin_lock?

	-ss

  reply	other threads:[~2017-04-03  6:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-04-03  5:17 [PATCH 0/5] zram clean up Minchan Kim
2017-04-03  5:17 ` [PATCH 1/5] zram: handle multiple pages attached bio's bvec Minchan Kim
2017-04-03 22:45   ` Andrew Morton
2017-04-03 23:13     ` Minchan Kim
2017-04-04  4:55   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-04-03  5:17 ` [PATCH 2/5] zram: partial IO refactoring Minchan Kim
2017-04-03  5:52   ` Mika Penttilä
2017-04-03  6:12     ` Minchan Kim
2017-04-03  6:57       ` Mika Penttilä
2017-04-04  2:17   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-04-04  4:50     ` Minchan Kim
2017-04-03  5:17 ` [PATCH 3/5] zram: use zram_slot_lock instead of raw bit_spin_lock op Minchan Kim
2017-04-03  6:08   ` Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2017-04-03  6:34     ` Minchan Kim
2017-04-03  8:06       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-04-04  2:18   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-04-04  4:50     ` Minchan Kim
2017-04-03  5:17 ` [PATCH 4/5] zram: remove zram_meta structure Minchan Kim
2017-04-04  2:31   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-04-04  4:52     ` Minchan Kim
2017-04-04  5:40     ` Minchan Kim
2017-04-04  5:54       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-04-03  5:17 ` [PATCH 5/5] zram: introduce zram data accessor Minchan Kim
2017-04-04  4:40   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-04-11  5:38 ` [PATCH 0/5] zram clean up Minchan Kim

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170403060858.GA17309@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain \
    --to=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®