linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/14] inode: move to per-sb LRU locks

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]

Message-ID: <20110711192144.GA23723@infradead.org>
Date:	Mon, 11 Jul 2011 15:21:44 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/14] inode: move to per-sb LRU locks

On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 02:14:40PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>
> 
> With the inode LRUs moving to per-sb structures, there is no longer
> a need for a global inode_lru_lock. The locking can be made more
> fine-grained by moving to a per-sb LRU lock, isolating the LRU
> operations of different filesytsems completely from each other.

Btw, any reason this is not done for dcache_lru_lock?

--
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/