On 14/11/17 01:18 PM, Christian König wrote:
> Am 14.11.2017 um 11:02 schrieb Michel Dänzer:
>> On 13/11/17 10:54 AM, Christian König wrote:
>>>
>>> + } else {
>>> + locked = reservation_object_trylock(bo->resv);
>>> + if (!locked)
>>> + c
Am 14.11.2017 um 11:02 schrieb Michel Dänzer:
On 13/11/17 10:54 AM, Christian König wrote:
Deleted BOs with the same reservation object can be reaped even if they
can't be reserved.
v2: rebase and we still need to remove/add the BO from/to the LRU.
v3: fix remove/add one more time, cleanup the
On 13/11/17 10:54 AM, Christian König wrote:
> Deleted BOs with the same reservation object can be reaped even if they
> can't be reserved.
>
> v2: rebase and we still need to remove/add the BO from/to the LRU.
> v3: fix remove/add one more time, cleanup the logic a bit
> v4: we should still check
Am 14.11.2017 um 03:40 schrieb Chunming Zhou:
On 2017年11月13日 17:54, Christian König wrote:
Deleted BOs with the same reservation object can be reaped even if they
can't be reserved.
v2: rebase and we still need to remove/add the BO from/to the LRU.
v3: fix remove/add one more time, cleanup th
On 2017年11月13日 17:54, Christian König wrote:
Deleted BOs with the same reservation object can be reaped even if they
can't be reserved.
v2: rebase and we still need to remove/add the BO from/to the LRU.
v3: fix remove/add one more time, cleanup the logic a bit
v4: we should still check if the
Deleted BOs with the same reservation object can be reaped even if they
can't be reserved.
v2: rebase and we still need to remove/add the BO from/to the LRU.
v3: fix remove/add one more time, cleanup the logic a bit
v4: we should still check if the eviction is valuable
Signed-off-by: Christian Kö
