[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180809000708.GA5566@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2018 17:07:08 -0700
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rafael@...nel.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, darrick.wong@...cle.com,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, josh@...htriplett.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
jiangshanlai@...il.com, hughd@...gle.com, shuah@...nel.org,
robh@...nel.org, ulf.hansson@...aro.org, aspriel@...il.com,
vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org, robin.murphy@....com, joe@...ches.com,
heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com, sfr@...b.auug.org.au,
vdavydov.dev@...il.com, chris@...is-wilson.co.uk,
penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp, aryabinin@...tuozzo.com,
ying.huang@...el.com, shakeelb@...gle.com, jbacik@...com,
mingo@...nel.org, mhiramat@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 01/10] rcu: Make CONFIG_SRCU unconditionally enabled
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 07:31:25AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> IMO, we've had enough recent bugs to deal with from shrinkers being
> called before the filesystem is set up and from trying to handle
> allocation errors during setup. Do we really want to make shrinker
> shutdown just as prone to mismanagement and subtle, hard to hit
> bugs? I don't think we do - unmount is simply not a critical
> performance path.
It's never been performance critical for me, but I'm not so sure that
there aren't container workloads which unmount filesystems multiple
times per second.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists