On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 04:22:30PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 01:34:06PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:12:22AM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > > Thank you for posting these patches. I was wondering if you had > > > run through some of the different combinations that you can > > > load the filesystems/tmem drivers in random order? The #4 patch > > > deleted a nice chunk of documentation that outlines the different > > > combinations. > > > > Yeah, I admit the synchronization between cleancache_register_ops and > > cleancache_init_fs is far not obvious. I should have updated the comment > > instead of merely dropping it, sorry. What about the following patch > > proving correctness of register_ops-vs-init_fs synchronization? It is > > meant to be applied incrementally on top of patch #4. > > Just fold it in please. But more importantly - I was wondering if you > had run throught the different combinations it outlines? Ah, you mean testing - I misunderstood you at first, sorry. Of course, I checked that a cleancache backend module works fine no matter if it is loaded before or after a filesystem is mounted. However, I used our own cleancache driver for testing (we are trying to use cleancache for containers). To be 100% sure that I did not occasionally break anything, today I installed XenServer on my test machine, enabled tmem both in dom0 and domU, and ran through all possible sequences of tmem load vs fs mount/use/unmount described in the old comment. Thanks, Vladimir -- 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>