[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <643.1197930966@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:36:06 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, viro@....linux.org.uk, hch@...radead.org,
Trond.Myklebust@...app.com, sds@...ho.nsa.gov,
casey@...aufler-ca.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
selinux@...ho.nsa.gov, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/28] FS-Cache: Recruit a couple of page flags for cache management [try #2]
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au> wrote:
> I'd much prefer if you would handle this in the filesystem, and have it
> set PG_private whenever fscache needs to receive a callback, and DTRT
> depending on whether PG_fscache etc. is set or not.
That's tricky and slower[*]. One of the things I want to do is to modify
iso9660 to do be able to do caching, but PG_private is 'owned' by the generic
buffer cache code.
[*] though perhaps not significantly.
> Also, this wait_on_page_fscache_write / end_page_fscache_write stuff
> seems like it would belong in your fscache headers rather than generic
> mm code (ditto for your PG_fscache checks in the page allocator -- you
> should use their PG_owner_priv_? names for that).
I suppose that's reasonable, though I do want to mention the PG_fscache* bits
in linux/page-flags.h so that anyone looking at those bits to select one to
use can easily see a reason they might not want to.
David
--
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