On Tue, 8 Mar 2016, Vineet Gupta wrote: > This in turn happened because slab_unlock() doesn't serialize properly > (doesn't use atomic clear) with a concurrent running > slab_lock()->test_and_set_bit() This is intentional because of the increased latency of atomic instructions. Why would the unlock need to be atomic? This patch will cause regressions. Guess this is an architecture specific issue of modified cachelines not becoming visible to other processors? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>