[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <453F6D90.4060106@sw.ru>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:58:40 +0400
From: Vasily Averin <vvs@...ru>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
CC: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, Jan Blunck <jblunck@...e.de>,
Olaf Hering <olh@...e.de>, Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>,
Kirill Korotaev <dev@...nvz.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
devel@...nvz.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Subject: Re: [Q] missing unused dentry in prune_dcache()?
David Howells wrote:
> Vasily Averin <vvs@...ru> wrote:
>> The patch adds this dentry into tail of the dentry_unused list.
>
> I think that's reasonable. I wonder if we can avoid removing it from the list
> in the first place, but I suspect it's less optimal.
Could you please explain this place in details, I do not understand why tail of
the list is better than head.
Also I do not understand why we should go to out in this case. Why we cannot use
next dentry in the list instead?
> Acked-By: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Thank you,
Vasily Averin
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists