[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120109190450.GA26390@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 14:04:50 -0500
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mgorman@...e.de, gregkh@...e.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
david@...morbit.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] shrink_dcache_parent() deadlock
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 10:46:22AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > Here's a TOTALLY UNTESTED rebase of just that single patch from Dave.
>
> Well, it boots, and the dentry cache shrinks under memory pressure. So
> it's not _totally_ untested now.
>
> But I don't really see why it would fix Miklos' case. I think
> select_parent() may still end up touching the d_lru list of something
> that is on the 'dispose' list. So the patch looks like a nice cleanup,
> but it seems to be independent of the issue Miklos found.
>
> What am I missing now?
After Dave's patch select_parent isolates dentries that are going to
be dropped directly to an on-stack list instead of abusing the LRU.
With that scheme the trylock and retry loop in __shrink_dcache_sb
goes away completely for this caller.
--
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