Hi Alexey,
> 10 mars 2017 kl. 22:54 skrev Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@xxxxxxxxx>:
>
>> On 11.03.2017 00:34, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 12:22:12AM +0300, Alexey Khoroshilov wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> z3fold_reclaim_page() contains the only return that may
>>> leave the function with pool->lock spinlock held.
>>>
>>> 669 spin_lock(&pool->lock);
>>> 670 if (kref_put(&zhdr->refcount, release_z3fold_page)) {
>>> 671 atomic64_dec(&pool->pages_nr);
>>> 672 return 0;
>>> 673 }
>>>
>>> May be we need spin_unlock(&pool->lock); just before return?
Looks so, thanks for the pointer. I'm currently commuting but will check it thoroughly tomorrow for sure.
~vitaly
>>
>> I would tend to agree. sparse warns about this, and also about two
>> other locking problems ... which I'm not sure are really problems so
>> much as missing annotations?
>>
>> mm/z3fold.c:467:35: warning: context imbalance in 'z3fold_alloc' - unexpected unlock
>> mm/z3fold.c:519:26: warning: context imbalance in 'z3fold_free' - different lock contexts for basic block
>> mm/z3fold.c:581:12: warning: context imbalance in 'z3fold_reclaim_page' - different lock contexts for basic block
>>
>
> I also do not see problems in z3fold_alloc() and z3fold_free().
> But I am unaware of sparse annotations that can help here.
>
> --
> Alexey
--
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
