[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49762EF1.3000001@google.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:07:13 -0800
From: Mike Waychison <mikew@...gle.com>
To: Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/8] Deferred batching of dput()
Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> Hi Mike.
>
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 06:29:42PM -0800, Mike Waychison (mikew@...gle.com) wrote:
>> +static void postpone_dput(struct dentry *dentry)
>> +{
>> + struct postponed_dentries *ppd, *new_ppd;
>> +
>> +again:
>> + ppd = get_cpu_var(postponed_dentries);
>> + if (!pending_dput_full(ppd)) {
>> + add_pending_dput(ppd, dentry);
>> + put_cpu_var(postponed_dentries);
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /* need to flush out existing pending dentries. */
>> + put_cpu_var(postponed_dentries);
>> + /* Allocate more space.. */
>> + new_ppd = new_postponed_dentries();
>> + if (!new_ppd) {
>> + /* Take the slow path, memory is low */
>> + struct postponed_dentries_onstack ppd_onstack;
>> + struct postponed_dentries *ppd;
>> +
>> + ppd = init_ppd_onstack(&ppd_onstack);
>> + add_pending_dput(ppd, dentry);
>> + process_postponed_dentries(ppd);
>> + return;
>> + }
>
> Why don't you want just to put the dentry in the lowmem condition?
>
You're right. This path could just use the original dput path. I'll
fix it up in the next version.
--
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