From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.sgi.com [192.48.179.30]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76291B70E9 for ; Sat, 2 Oct 2010 04:45:40 +1000 (EST) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 13:45:38 -0500 From: Robin Holt To: Nathan Fontenot Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] v3 Add mutex for adding/removing memory blocks Message-ID: <20101001184538.GI14064@sgi.com> References: <4CA62700.7010809@austin.ibm.com> <4CA62896.2060307@austin.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <4CA62896.2060307@austin.ibm.com> Cc: Greg KH , steiner@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen , linux-mm@kvack.org, Robin Holt , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 01:29:42PM -0500, Nathan Fontenot wrote: > Add a new mutex for use in adding and removing of memory blocks. This > is needed to avoid any race conditions in which the same memory block could > be added and removed at the same time. > > Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot Reviewed-by: Robin Holt I am fine with this patch by itself, but its only real function is to protect the count introduced by the next patch. You might want to combine the patches, but if not, that is fine as well. Robin From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754782Ab0JASpk (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Oct 2010 14:45:40 -0400 Received: from relay2.sgi.com ([192.48.179.30]:34158 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753715Ab0JASpj (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Oct 2010 14:45:39 -0400 Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 13:45:38 -0500 From: Robin Holt To: Nathan Fontenot Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Greg KH , Dave Hansen , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Robin Holt , steiner@sgi.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] v3 Add mutex for adding/removing memory blocks Message-ID: <20101001184538.GI14064@sgi.com> References: <4CA62700.7010809@austin.ibm.com> <4CA62896.2060307@austin.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4CA62896.2060307@austin.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 01:29:42PM -0500, Nathan Fontenot wrote: > Add a new mutex for use in adding and removing of memory blocks. This > is needed to avoid any race conditions in which the same memory block could > be added and removed at the same time. > > Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot Reviewed-by: Robin Holt I am fine with this patch by itself, but its only real function is to protect the count introduced by the next patch. You might want to combine the patches, but if not, that is fine as well. Robin From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail138.messagelabs.com (mail138.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 396D46B0047 for ; Fri, 1 Oct 2010 14:45:40 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 13:45:38 -0500 From: Robin Holt Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] v3 Add mutex for adding/removing memory blocks Message-ID: <20101001184538.GI14064@sgi.com> References: <4CA62700.7010809@austin.ibm.com> <4CA62896.2060307@austin.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4CA62896.2060307@austin.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Nathan Fontenot Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Greg KH , Dave Hansen , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Robin Holt , steiner@sgi.com List-ID: On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 01:29:42PM -0500, Nathan Fontenot wrote: > Add a new mutex for use in adding and removing of memory blocks. This > is needed to avoid any race conditions in which the same memory block could > be added and removed at the same time. > > Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot Reviewed-by: Robin Holt I am fine with this patch by itself, but its only real function is to protect the count introduced by the next patch. You might want to combine the patches, but if not, that is fine as well. Robin -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org