[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140429175654.GI18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 18:56:54 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: dcache shrink list corruption?
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 06:01:39PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> Attached patch is just a starting point (untested). Not sure how to minimize
> contention without adding too much complexity.
Contention isn't the worst problem here - I'd expect the cacheline ping-pong
to hurt more... I agree with the analysis, but I'd really like to avoid that
spinlock ;-/
Let me see if we can avoid that... Oh, well - at least that's a good excuse
to take a break from fucking deadlock analysis around the damn acct(2), most
of VFS and network filesystems ;-/
--
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