linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/19] fs: Convert nr_inodes and nr

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 16 Oct 2010 21:12:04 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/19] fs: Convert nr_inodes and nr_unused to per-cpu
 counters

On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 12:09:44PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > fwiw, for_each_*_cpu() takes longer than a single jiffy tick on those
> > machines.
> 
> Yes, agreed. I'm not sure we need exact summation for these counters,
> but I haven't wanted to bring inaccuracies into the code at this
> point in time. I need to investigate the effect of using the
> approximate summation values in all the cases they are used.

Use of the dirty inodes numbers in the writeback code is something
that does not make much sense.  It was added as an undocumented
workaround somewhere in the old writeback code, and spread to even
more sites over time.  I'm pretty sure we don't actually need it,
but I'm not quite sure what we actually need.
--
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/