From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CF5CC43332 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 17:16:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0029923B1F for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 17:16:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729054AbhANRQF (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jan 2021 12:16:05 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44474 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728588AbhANRQB (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jan 2021 12:16:01 -0500 Received: from mail-lf1-x12b.google.com (mail-lf1-x12b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C5A4C0613ED for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 09:15:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id o19so9107351lfo.1 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 09:15:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=konsulko.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jRpbugOzzcD4vWdxqQSiB7WPu9j6z6Mr66iAcSSwJZc=; b=YFsUaEXzE7PwG8/PiSPYv+xFcwhW6um3lZ+PQtUVk7nx4B1GE1smOkJPyTLcP8iUKL 24F+TGLfPFfcEFUEZruZ28RvSZp3DbPwD2BG5twLXzcZp2xHP/pDyV9ItDSp5eY4gSP0 0G4TsA7FGmmSnnoUN80m74Agih4U2RgekH4+g= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jRpbugOzzcD4vWdxqQSiB7WPu9j6z6Mr66iAcSSwJZc=; b=IvNCHvleFzfsXN+mABNTiRc89nCMZ/4kop0KSXceK+vR8Z2c3mpsyXW9XaBXMCEhDq bGWctfllftW0lg6njt1e2B2+a2Ru70E4Z60VMT38Kr6j75/W3p/wNcLy7LDC5L/RQPAK 0ZAmmIppLyhjo8DtmpnF2YTALPhVfSXeQv7MDtfzMkp8OV3GKPVW4SpceRD7tovYF2Sq ijJyi14ePepQQ5p4TrwT1E01yuOI+zCCTY8XVysc5xx+w/zSZbeH5PQJbEneRVaOKcTF PKjnRswMII+Z9HaVwyZPX3z7I1JbLBvb9wY3E0SH+tWZa6cvk9zvQ7aFNwRf249dr6zk QYBQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531kA9DaK1VfZPF06RCSwye5LEiN8S6NuMPTW+bCB+OgR/6IcIiN hnUzAoK2aGEGMKgHEdRihMjK2apx/B8J14NG1NxQBw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw98wVFP/xXJJyWVqxebD2K8/3IKxc6BaafZzZCj+GPq53hclI4p29ibHEaPZZ65JbG9eLIXGPKMIczkIj5qA0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:2009:: with SMTP id a9mr3491536lfb.575.1610644519634; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 09:15:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4490cb6a7e2243fba374e40652979e46@hisilicon.com> <08cbef1e43634c4099709be8e99e5d27@hisilicon.com> <1d0d4a3576e74d128d7849342a7e9faf@hisilicon.com> <4e686c73-b453-e714-021a-1fcd0a565984@huawei.com> <20210114161850.zjcfhsgtmojjjqba@linutronix.de> <20210114165645.czqpsk3lacmiyiik@linutronix.de> In-Reply-To: <20210114165645.czqpsk3lacmiyiik@linutronix.de> From: Vitaly Wool Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2021 18:15:08 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] zsmalloc: do not use bit_spin_lock To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: "tiantao (H)" , "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" , Shakeel Butt , Minchan Kim , Mike Galbraith , LKML , linux-mm , NitinGupta , Sergey Senozhatsky , Andrew Morton , "tiantao (H)" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 5:56 PM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > On 2021-01-14 17:29:37 [+0100], Vitaly Wool wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Jan 2021, 17:18 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, > > wrote: > > > > > > On 2020-12-23 19:25:02 [+0100], Vitaly Wool wrote: > > > > > write the following patch according to your idea, what do you think ? > > > > > > > > Yep, that is basically what I was thinking of. Some nitpicks below: > > > > > > Did this go somewhere? The thread just ends here on my end. > > > Mike, is this patch fixing / helping your case in anyway? > > > > Please see > > * https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=160889419514019&w=2 > > * https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=160889418114011&w=2 > > * https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=160889448814057&w=2 > > Thank you, that would be > 1608894171-54174-1-git-send-email-tiantao6@hisilicon.com > > for b4 compatibility :) > > > Haven't had time to test these yet but seem to be alright. > > So zs_map_object() still disables preemption but the mutex part is > avoided by the patch? Basically, yes. Minchan was very clear that he didn't want to remove that inter-function locking, so be it. I wouldn't really advise to use zsmalloc with zswap because zsmalloc has no support for reclaim, nevertheless I wouldn't like this configuration to stop working for those who are already using it. Would you or Mike be up for testing Tian Taos's patchset? Best regards, Vitaly