[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <x491v6vakux.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 10:36:06 -0500
From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] dio: scale unaligned IO tracking via multiple lists
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> writes:
> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>
>
> To avoid concerns that a single list and lock tracking the unaligned
> IOs will not scale appropriately, create multiple lists and locks
> and chose them by hashing the unaligned block being zeroed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>
> ---
> fs/direct-io.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/direct-io.c b/fs/direct-io.c
> index 1a69efd..353ac52 100644
> --- a/fs/direct-io.c
> +++ b/fs/direct-io.c
> @@ -152,8 +152,28 @@ struct dio_zero_block {
> atomic_t ref; /* reference count */
> };
>
> -static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(dio_zero_block_lock);
> -static LIST_HEAD(dio_zero_block_list);
> +#define DIO_ZERO_BLOCK_NR 37LL
I'm always curious to know how these numbers are derived. Why 37?
Cheers,
Jeff
--
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