Hello, On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:23:53PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > instead (possibly just "spin_unlock_wait()" - but the explicit loop I see. Wasn't thinking about cache traffic. Yeah, spin_unlock_wait() seems a lot better. > might be worth it if you then want to check the "canceling" flag > independently of the lock state too). > > In general, it's very dangerous to try to cook up your own locking > rules. People *always* get it wrong. It's either trylock on timer side or timer active spinning trick on canceling side, so this seems the lesser of the two evils. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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>