[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <00bf01d13c90$14e0f7a0$3ea2e6e0$@samsung.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 16:08:46 +0800
From: Chao Yu <chao2.yu@...sung.com>
To: 'Jaegeuk Kim' <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: RE: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/2] f2fs: use atomic variable for
total_extent_tree
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jaegeuk Kim [mailto:jaegeuk@...nel.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 3:35 PM
> To: Chao Yu
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org;
> linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/2] f2fs: use atomic variable for total_extent_tree
>
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 01:28:09PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> > Hi Jaegeuk,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jaegeuk Kim [mailto:jaegeuk@...nel.org]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 11:39 AM
> > > To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org;
> > > linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
> > > Cc: Jaegeuk Kim
> > > Subject: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/2] f2fs: use atomic variable for total_extent_tree
> > >
> > > It would be better to use atomic variable for total_extent_tree.
> >
> > total_extent_tree was protected by extent_tree_lock semaphore, so intention here
> > is to make related calculation in available_free_memory or update_general_status
> > more accurate, right?
>
> Moreover, another major thing is to specify it is atomic along with other extent
> counts.
Right, :) Please add:
Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <chao2.yu@...sung.com>
--
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