On (03/30/16 10:56), Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
[..]
> >+static inline void zram_unlock_table(struct zram_table_entry *table)
> >+{
> >+ __clear_bit(ZRAM_ACCESS, &table->value);
> >+ spin_unlock(&table->lock);
> >+}
>
> ZRAM_ACCESS is the only bit used for locking. ZRAM_ZERO is the only flag
> set / tested.
> Would it be possible to make value u32 and add a spinlock? value is has
> not 64bit on 64bit systems and it uses only the first 23bits for the
> size and bit 24+25 for the two flags we have now. So the size should not
> change on 64bit systems only increase by four byte on 32bit systems.
> That is without the lock debugging of course.
>
> Minchan, Nitin, Sergey do see any reason not to do so?
that's increased size for every table entry + lock debugging bloat;
not exactly what zram is trying to do. sounds bad enough.
-ss
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
