On 2023/10/24 00:22, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 01:32:27PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> _Assuming_ that it's safe to use the non-atomic flag setting, I'd
>> rather see this done as ...
>>
>> static inline void slab_set_node_partial(struct slab *slab)
>> {
>> __folio_set_workingset(slab_folio(slab));
>
> Ugh, I meant to delete this line. I meant to just write the next line.
>
>> __set_bit(PG_workingset, folio_flags(slab_folio(slab), 0));
>> }
Yes, it's safe to use the non-atomic version here, since it's protected
by the slub per-node list_lock and we want better performance here.
Ok, will change to directly use __set_bit() and __clear_bit() instead of
polluting the "workingset" interfaces there.
Thanks.
