On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 06:12:55PM +0300, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > Calling handle_pending_slot_free() for every RW operation may > cause unneccessary slot_free_lock locking, because most likely > process will see NULL slot_free_rq. handle_pending_slot_free() > only when current detects that slot_free_rq is not NULL. > > v2: protect handle_pending_slot_free() with zram rw_lock. > zram->slot_free_lock protects zram->slot_free_rq but shouldn't the zram rw_lock be wrapped around the whole operation like the original code does? I don't know the zram code, but the original looks like it makes sense but in this one it looks like the locks are duplicative. Is the down_read() in the original code be changed to down_write()? regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
