From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752930AbcEPBTo (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 May 2016 21:19:44 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f66.google.com ([209.85.220.66]:36378 "EHLO mail-pa0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752351AbcEPBTm (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 May 2016 21:19:42 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 10:17:31 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky To: Minchan Kim Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Sergey Senozhatsky Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 05/12] zsmalloc: use bit_spin_lock Message-ID: <20160516011730.GA504@swordfish> References: <1462760433-32357-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> <1462760433-32357-6-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1462760433-32357-6-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On (05/09/16 11:20), Minchan Kim wrote: > > Use kernel standard bit spin-lock instead of custom mess. Even, it has > a bug which doesn't disable preemption. The reason we don't have any > problem is that we have used it during preemption disable section > by class->lock spinlock. So no need to go to stable. > > Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim good change. Reviewed-by: Sergey Senozhatsky -ss