Shakeel Butt wrote: > > If you can accept serialized register_shrinker()/unregister_shrinker(), > > I think that something like shown below can do it. > > If we assume that we will never do register_shrinker and > unregister_shrinker on the same object in parallel then do we still > need to do msleep & synchronize_rcu() within mutex?
Doing register_shrinker() and unregister_shrinker() on the same object in parallel is wrong. This mutex is to ensure that we do not need to worry about ->list.next field. synchronize_rcu() should not be slow. If you want to avoid msleep() with mutex held, you can also apply > > If you want parallel register_shrinker()/unregister_shrinker(), something > > like > > shown below on top of shown above will do it. change.
