On 2024-07-05 14:49:13 [+0200], To linux-block@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Hi, > this is follow up to the previous posting, making the lock > unconditionally. The original problem with bit spinlock is that it > disabled preemption and the following operations (within the atomic > section) perform operations that may sleep on PREEMPT_RT. Mike expressed > that he would like to keep using zram on PREEMPT_RT. > > v2…v3 https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240620153556.777272-1-bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > - Do "size_t index" within the for loop. Can this be applied, please? Or v2 ;) Sebastian
