[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <10376.1496312768@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2017 11:26:08 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org,
Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@....ntt.co.jp>,
linux-nilfs@...r.kernel.org, Bob Peterson <rpeterso@...hat.com>,
cluster-devel@...hat.com, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, tytso@....edu,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>,
"Yan, Zheng" <zyan@...hat.com>, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
"Darrick J . Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
Nadia Yvette Chambers <nyc@...omorphy.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/35] fscache: Remove unused ->now_uncached callback
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> wrote:
> The callback doesn't ever get called. Remove it.
Hmmm... I should perhaps be calling this. I'm not sure why I never did.
At the moment, it doesn't strictly matter as ops on pages marked with
PG_fscache get ignored if the cache has suffered an I/O error or has been
withdrawn - but it will incur a performance penalty (the PG_fscache flag is
checked in the netfs before calling into fscache).
The downside of calling this is that when a cache is removed, fscache would go
through all the cookies for that cache and iterate over all the pages
associated with those cookies - which could cause a performance dip in the
system.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists