All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] superblock: introduce per-sb cache shrinker infrastructure
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 02:41:16 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100526164116.GD22536@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1274777588-21494-4-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>

On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 06:53:06PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> @@ -456,21 +456,16 @@ static void prune_one_dentry(struct dentry * dentry)
>   * which flags are set. This means we don't need to maintain multiple
>   * similar copies of this loop.
>   */
> -static void __shrink_dcache_sb(struct super_block *sb, int *count, int flags)
> +static void __shrink_dcache_sb(struct super_block *sb, int count, int flags)
>  {
>  	LIST_HEAD(referenced);
>  	LIST_HEAD(tmp);
>  	struct dentry *dentry;
> -	int cnt = 0;
>  
>  	BUG_ON(!sb);
> -	BUG_ON((flags & DCACHE_REFERENCED) && count == NULL);
> +	BUG_ON((flags & DCACHE_REFERENCED) && count == -1);
>  	spin_lock(&dcache_lock);
> -	if (count != NULL)
> -		/* called from prune_dcache() and shrink_dcache_parent() */
> -		cnt = *count;
> -restart:
> -	if (count == NULL)
> +	if (count == -1)
>  		list_splice_init(&sb->s_dentry_lru, &tmp);
>  	else {
>  		while (!list_empty(&sb->s_dentry_lru)) {
> @@ -492,13 +487,13 @@ restart:
>  			} else {
>  				list_move_tail(&dentry->d_lru, &tmp);
>  				spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
> -				cnt--;
> -				if (!cnt)
> +				if (--count == 0)
>  					break;
>  			}
>  			cond_resched_lock(&dcache_lock);
>  		}
>  	}
> +prune_more:
>  	while (!list_empty(&tmp)) {
>  		dentry = list_entry(tmp.prev, struct dentry, d_lru);
>  		dentry_lru_del_init(dentry);
> @@ -516,88 +511,29 @@ restart:
>  		/* dentry->d_lock was dropped in prune_one_dentry() */
>  		cond_resched_lock(&dcache_lock);
>  	}
> -	if (count == NULL && !list_empty(&sb->s_dentry_lru))
> -		goto restart;
> -	if (count != NULL)
> -		*count = cnt;
> +	if (count == -1 && !list_empty(&sb->s_dentry_lru)) {
> +		list_splice_init(&sb->s_dentry_lru, &tmp);
> +		goto prune_more;
> +	}

Nitpick but I prefer just the restart label wher it is previously. This
is moving setup for the next iteration into the "error" case.


> +static int prune_super(struct shrinker *shrink, int nr_to_scan, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> +{
> +	struct super_block *sb;
> +	int count;
> +
> +	sb = container_of(shrink, struct super_block, s_shrink);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Deadlock avoidance.  We may hold various FS locks, and we don't want
> +	 * to recurse into the FS that called us in clear_inode() and friends..
> +	 */
> +	if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_FS))
> +		return -1;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * if we can't get the umount lock, then there's no point having the
> +	 * shrinker try again because the sb is being torn down.
> +	 */
> +	if (!down_read_trylock(&sb->s_umount))
> +		return -1;

Would you just elaborate on the lock order problem somewhere? (the
comment makes it look like we *could* take the mutex if we wanted
to).


> +
> +	if (!sb->s_root) {
> +		up_read(&sb->s_umount);
> +		return -1;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (nr_to_scan) {
> +		/* proportion the scan between the two cacheѕ */
> +		int total;
> +
> +		total = sb->s_nr_dentry_unused + sb->s_nr_inodes_unused + 1;
> +		count = (nr_to_scan * sb->s_nr_dentry_unused) / total;
> +
> +		/* prune dcache first as icache is pinned by it */
> +		prune_dcache_sb(sb, count);
> +		prune_icache_sb(sb, nr_to_scan - count);
> +	}
> +
> +	count = ((sb->s_nr_dentry_unused + sb->s_nr_inodes_unused) / 100)
> +						* sysctl_vfs_cache_pressure;

Do you think truncating in the divisions is at all a problem? It
probably doesn't matter much I suppose.

> @@ -162,6 +213,7 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
>  	struct file_system_type *fs = s->s_type;
>  	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&s->s_active)) {
>  		vfs_dq_off(s, 0);
> +		unregister_shrinker(&s->s_shrink);
>  		fs->kill_sb(s);
>  		put_filesystem(fs);
>  		put_super(s);
> @@ -335,6 +387,7 @@ retry:
>  	list_add_tail(&s->s_list, &super_blocks);
>  	list_add(&s->s_instances, &type->fs_supers);
>  	spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
> +	register_shrinker(&s->s_shrink);
>  	get_filesystem(type);
>  	return s;
>  }
> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
> index 7b90c43..5bff2dc 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> @@ -382,6 +382,7 @@ struct inodes_stat_t {
>  #include <linux/capability.h>
>  #include <linux/semaphore.h>
>  #include <linux/fiemap.h>
> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>  
>  #include <asm/atomic.h>
>  #include <asm/byteorder.h>
> @@ -1385,8 +1386,14 @@ struct super_block {
>  	 * generic_show_options()
>  	 */
>  	char *s_options;
> +
> +	struct shrinker s_shrink;	/* per-sb shrinker handle */
>  };

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] superblock: introduce per-sb cache shrinker infrastructure
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 02:41:16 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100526164116.GD22536@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1274777588-21494-4-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>

On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 06:53:06PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> @@ -456,21 +456,16 @@ static void prune_one_dentry(struct dentry * dentry)
>   * which flags are set. This means we don't need to maintain multiple
>   * similar copies of this loop.
>   */
> -static void __shrink_dcache_sb(struct super_block *sb, int *count, int flags)
> +static void __shrink_dcache_sb(struct super_block *sb, int count, int flags)
>  {
>  	LIST_HEAD(referenced);
>  	LIST_HEAD(tmp);
>  	struct dentry *dentry;
> -	int cnt = 0;
>  
>  	BUG_ON(!sb);
> -	BUG_ON((flags & DCACHE_REFERENCED) && count == NULL);
> +	BUG_ON((flags & DCACHE_REFERENCED) && count == -1);
>  	spin_lock(&dcache_lock);
> -	if (count != NULL)
> -		/* called from prune_dcache() and shrink_dcache_parent() */
> -		cnt = *count;
> -restart:
> -	if (count == NULL)
> +	if (count == -1)
>  		list_splice_init(&sb->s_dentry_lru, &tmp);
>  	else {
>  		while (!list_empty(&sb->s_dentry_lru)) {
> @@ -492,13 +487,13 @@ restart:
>  			} else {
>  				list_move_tail(&dentry->d_lru, &tmp);
>  				spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
> -				cnt--;
> -				if (!cnt)
> +				if (--count == 0)
>  					break;
>  			}
>  			cond_resched_lock(&dcache_lock);
>  		}
>  	}
> +prune_more:
>  	while (!list_empty(&tmp)) {
>  		dentry = list_entry(tmp.prev, struct dentry, d_lru);
>  		dentry_lru_del_init(dentry);
> @@ -516,88 +511,29 @@ restart:
>  		/* dentry->d_lock was dropped in prune_one_dentry() */
>  		cond_resched_lock(&dcache_lock);
>  	}
> -	if (count == NULL && !list_empty(&sb->s_dentry_lru))
> -		goto restart;
> -	if (count != NULL)
> -		*count = cnt;
> +	if (count == -1 && !list_empty(&sb->s_dentry_lru)) {
> +		list_splice_init(&sb->s_dentry_lru, &tmp);
> +		goto prune_more;
> +	}

Nitpick but I prefer just the restart label wher it is previously. This
is moving setup for the next iteration into the "error" case.


> +static int prune_super(struct shrinker *shrink, int nr_to_scan, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> +{
> +	struct super_block *sb;
> +	int count;
> +
> +	sb = container_of(shrink, struct super_block, s_shrink);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Deadlock avoidance.  We may hold various FS locks, and we don't want
> +	 * to recurse into the FS that called us in clear_inode() and friends..
> +	 */
> +	if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_FS))
> +		return -1;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * if we can't get the umount lock, then there's no point having the
> +	 * shrinker try again because the sb is being torn down.
> +	 */
> +	if (!down_read_trylock(&sb->s_umount))
> +		return -1;

Would you just elaborate on the lock order problem somewhere? (the
comment makes it look like we *could* take the mutex if we wanted
to).


> +
> +	if (!sb->s_root) {
> +		up_read(&sb->s_umount);
> +		return -1;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (nr_to_scan) {
> +		/* proportion the scan between the two cacheѕ */
> +		int total;
> +
> +		total = sb->s_nr_dentry_unused + sb->s_nr_inodes_unused + 1;
> +		count = (nr_to_scan * sb->s_nr_dentry_unused) / total;
> +
> +		/* prune dcache first as icache is pinned by it */
> +		prune_dcache_sb(sb, count);
> +		prune_icache_sb(sb, nr_to_scan - count);
> +	}
> +
> +	count = ((sb->s_nr_dentry_unused + sb->s_nr_inodes_unused) / 100)
> +						* sysctl_vfs_cache_pressure;

Do you think truncating in the divisions is at all a problem? It
probably doesn't matter much I suppose.

> @@ -162,6 +213,7 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
>  	struct file_system_type *fs = s->s_type;
>  	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&s->s_active)) {
>  		vfs_dq_off(s, 0);
> +		unregister_shrinker(&s->s_shrink);
>  		fs->kill_sb(s);
>  		put_filesystem(fs);
>  		put_super(s);
> @@ -335,6 +387,7 @@ retry:
>  	list_add_tail(&s->s_list, &super_blocks);
>  	list_add(&s->s_instances, &type->fs_supers);
>  	spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
> +	register_shrinker(&s->s_shrink);
>  	get_filesystem(type);
>  	return s;
>  }
> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
> index 7b90c43..5bff2dc 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> @@ -382,6 +382,7 @@ struct inodes_stat_t {
>  #include <linux/capability.h>
>  #include <linux/semaphore.h>
>  #include <linux/fiemap.h>
> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>  
>  #include <asm/atomic.h>
>  #include <asm/byteorder.h>
> @@ -1385,8 +1386,14 @@ struct super_block {
>  	 * generic_show_options()
>  	 */
>  	char *s_options;
> +
> +	struct shrinker s_shrink;	/* per-sb shrinker handle */
>  };

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] superblock: introduce per-sb cache shrinker infrastructure
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 02:41:16 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100526164116.GD22536@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1274777588-21494-4-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>

On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 06:53:06PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> @@ -456,21 +456,16 @@ static void prune_one_dentry(struct dentry * dentry)
>   * which flags are set. This means we don't need to maintain multiple
>   * similar copies of this loop.
>   */
> -static void __shrink_dcache_sb(struct super_block *sb, int *count, int flags)
> +static void __shrink_dcache_sb(struct super_block *sb, int count, int flags)
>  {
>  	LIST_HEAD(referenced);
>  	LIST_HEAD(tmp);
>  	struct dentry *dentry;
> -	int cnt = 0;
>  
>  	BUG_ON(!sb);
> -	BUG_ON((flags & DCACHE_REFERENCED) && count == NULL);
> +	BUG_ON((flags & DCACHE_REFERENCED) && count == -1);
>  	spin_lock(&dcache_lock);
> -	if (count != NULL)
> -		/* called from prune_dcache() and shrink_dcache_parent() */
> -		cnt = *count;
> -restart:
> -	if (count == NULL)
> +	if (count == -1)
>  		list_splice_init(&sb->s_dentry_lru, &tmp);
>  	else {
>  		while (!list_empty(&sb->s_dentry_lru)) {
> @@ -492,13 +487,13 @@ restart:
>  			} else {
>  				list_move_tail(&dentry->d_lru, &tmp);
>  				spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
> -				cnt--;
> -				if (!cnt)
> +				if (--count == 0)
>  					break;
>  			}
>  			cond_resched_lock(&dcache_lock);
>  		}
>  	}
> +prune_more:
>  	while (!list_empty(&tmp)) {
>  		dentry = list_entry(tmp.prev, struct dentry, d_lru);
>  		dentry_lru_del_init(dentry);
> @@ -516,88 +511,29 @@ restart:
>  		/* dentry->d_lock was dropped in prune_one_dentry() */
>  		cond_resched_lock(&dcache_lock);
>  	}
> -	if (count == NULL && !list_empty(&sb->s_dentry_lru))
> -		goto restart;
> -	if (count != NULL)
> -		*count = cnt;
> +	if (count == -1 && !list_empty(&sb->s_dentry_lru)) {
> +		list_splice_init(&sb->s_dentry_lru, &tmp);
> +		goto prune_more;
> +	}

Nitpick but I prefer just the restart label wher it is previously. This
is moving setup for the next iteration into the "error" case.


> +static int prune_super(struct shrinker *shrink, int nr_to_scan, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> +{
> +	struct super_block *sb;
> +	int count;
> +
> +	sb = container_of(shrink, struct super_block, s_shrink);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Deadlock avoidance.  We may hold various FS locks, and we don't want
> +	 * to recurse into the FS that called us in clear_inode() and friends..
> +	 */
> +	if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_FS))
> +		return -1;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * if we can't get the umount lock, then there's no point having the
> +	 * shrinker try again because the sb is being torn down.
> +	 */
> +	if (!down_read_trylock(&sb->s_umount))
> +		return -1;

Would you just elaborate on the lock order problem somewhere? (the
comment makes it look like we *could* take the mutex if we wanted
to).


> +
> +	if (!sb->s_root) {
> +		up_read(&sb->s_umount);
> +		return -1;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (nr_to_scan) {
> +		/* proportion the scan between the two cacheѕ */
> +		int total;
> +
> +		total = sb->s_nr_dentry_unused + sb->s_nr_inodes_unused + 1;
> +		count = (nr_to_scan * sb->s_nr_dentry_unused) / total;
> +
> +		/* prune dcache first as icache is pinned by it */
> +		prune_dcache_sb(sb, count);
> +		prune_icache_sb(sb, nr_to_scan - count);
> +	}
> +
> +	count = ((sb->s_nr_dentry_unused + sb->s_nr_inodes_unused) / 100)
> +						* sysctl_vfs_cache_pressure;

Do you think truncating in the divisions is at all a problem? It
probably doesn't matter much I suppose.

> @@ -162,6 +213,7 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
>  	struct file_system_type *fs = s->s_type;
>  	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&s->s_active)) {
>  		vfs_dq_off(s, 0);
> +		unregister_shrinker(&s->s_shrink);
>  		fs->kill_sb(s);
>  		put_filesystem(fs);
>  		put_super(s);
> @@ -335,6 +387,7 @@ retry:
>  	list_add_tail(&s->s_list, &super_blocks);
>  	list_add(&s->s_instances, &type->fs_supers);
>  	spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
> +	register_shrinker(&s->s_shrink);
>  	get_filesystem(type);
>  	return s;
>  }
> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
> index 7b90c43..5bff2dc 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> @@ -382,6 +382,7 @@ struct inodes_stat_t {
>  #include <linux/capability.h>
>  #include <linux/semaphore.h>
>  #include <linux/fiemap.h>
> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>  
>  #include <asm/atomic.h>
>  #include <asm/byteorder.h>
> @@ -1385,8 +1386,14 @@ struct super_block {
>  	 * generic_show_options()
>  	 */
>  	char *s_options;
> +
> +	struct shrinker s_shrink;	/* per-sb shrinker handle */
>  };

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] superblock: introduce per-sb cache shrinker infrastructure
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 02:41:16 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100526164116.GD22536@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1274777588-21494-4-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>

On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 06:53:06PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> @@ -456,21 +456,16 @@ static void prune_one_dentry(struct dentry * dentry)
>   * which flags are set. This means we don't need to maintain multiple
>   * similar copies of this loop.
>   */
> -static void __shrink_dcache_sb(struct super_block *sb, int *count, int flags)
> +static void __shrink_dcache_sb(struct super_block *sb, int count, int flags)
>  {
>  	LIST_HEAD(referenced);
>  	LIST_HEAD(tmp);
>  	struct dentry *dentry;
> -	int cnt = 0;
>  
>  	BUG_ON(!sb);
> -	BUG_ON((flags & DCACHE_REFERENCED) && count == NULL);
> +	BUG_ON((flags & DCACHE_REFERENCED) && count == -1);
>  	spin_lock(&dcache_lock);
> -	if (count != NULL)
> -		/* called from prune_dcache() and shrink_dcache_parent() */
> -		cnt = *count;
> -restart:
> -	if (count == NULL)
> +	if (count == -1)
>  		list_splice_init(&sb->s_dentry_lru, &tmp);
>  	else {
>  		while (!list_empty(&sb->s_dentry_lru)) {
> @@ -492,13 +487,13 @@ restart:
>  			} else {
>  				list_move_tail(&dentry->d_lru, &tmp);
>  				spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
> -				cnt--;
> -				if (!cnt)
> +				if (--count == 0)
>  					break;
>  			}
>  			cond_resched_lock(&dcache_lock);
>  		}
>  	}
> +prune_more:
>  	while (!list_empty(&tmp)) {
>  		dentry = list_entry(tmp.prev, struct dentry, d_lru);
>  		dentry_lru_del_init(dentry);
> @@ -516,88 +511,29 @@ restart:
>  		/* dentry->d_lock was dropped in prune_one_dentry() */
>  		cond_resched_lock(&dcache_lock);
>  	}
> -	if (count == NULL && !list_empty(&sb->s_dentry_lru))
> -		goto restart;
> -	if (count != NULL)
> -		*count = cnt;
> +	if (count == -1 && !list_empty(&sb->s_dentry_lru)) {
> +		list_splice_init(&sb->s_dentry_lru, &tmp);
> +		goto prune_more;
> +	}

Nitpick but I prefer just the restart label wher it is previously. This
is moving setup for the next iteration into the "error" case.


> +static int prune_super(struct shrinker *shrink, int nr_to_scan, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> +{
> +	struct super_block *sb;
> +	int count;
> +
> +	sb = container_of(shrink, struct super_block, s_shrink);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Deadlock avoidance.  We may hold various FS locks, and we don't want
> +	 * to recurse into the FS that called us in clear_inode() and friends..
> +	 */
> +	if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_FS))
> +		return -1;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * if we can't get the umount lock, then there's no point having the
> +	 * shrinker try again because the sb is being torn down.
> +	 */
> +	if (!down_read_trylock(&sb->s_umount))
> +		return -1;

Would you just elaborate on the lock order problem somewhere? (the
comment makes it look like we *could* take the mutex if we wanted
to).


> +
> +	if (!sb->s_root) {
> +		up_read(&sb->s_umount);
> +		return -1;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (nr_to_scan) {
> +		/* proportion the scan between the two cacheN? */
> +		int total;
> +
> +		total = sb->s_nr_dentry_unused + sb->s_nr_inodes_unused + 1;
> +		count = (nr_to_scan * sb->s_nr_dentry_unused) / total;
> +
> +		/* prune dcache first as icache is pinned by it */
> +		prune_dcache_sb(sb, count);
> +		prune_icache_sb(sb, nr_to_scan - count);
> +	}
> +
> +	count = ((sb->s_nr_dentry_unused + sb->s_nr_inodes_unused) / 100)
> +						* sysctl_vfs_cache_pressure;

Do you think truncating in the divisions is at all a problem? It
probably doesn't matter much I suppose.

> @@ -162,6 +213,7 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
>  	struct file_system_type *fs = s->s_type;
>  	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&s->s_active)) {
>  		vfs_dq_off(s, 0);
> +		unregister_shrinker(&s->s_shrink);
>  		fs->kill_sb(s);
>  		put_filesystem(fs);
>  		put_super(s);
> @@ -335,6 +387,7 @@ retry:
>  	list_add_tail(&s->s_list, &super_blocks);
>  	list_add(&s->s_instances, &type->fs_supers);
>  	spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
> +	register_shrinker(&s->s_shrink);
>  	get_filesystem(type);
>  	return s;
>  }
> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
> index 7b90c43..5bff2dc 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> @@ -382,6 +382,7 @@ struct inodes_stat_t {
>  #include <linux/capability.h>
>  #include <linux/semaphore.h>
>  #include <linux/fiemap.h>
> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>  
>  #include <asm/atomic.h>
>  #include <asm/byteorder.h>
> @@ -1385,8 +1386,14 @@ struct super_block {
>  	 * generic_show_options()
>  	 */
>  	char *s_options;
> +
> +	struct shrinker s_shrink;	/* per-sb shrinker handle */
>  };

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-05-26 16:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 133+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-25  8:53 [PATCH 0/5] Per superblock shrinkers V2 Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53 ` [PATCH 1/5] inode: Make unused inode LRU per superblock Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-26 16:17   ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-26 16:17     ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-26 16:17     ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-26 23:01     ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-26 23:01       ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-26 23:01       ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-26 23:01       ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  2:04       ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  2:04         ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  2:04         ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  2:04         ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  4:02         ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  4:02           ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  4:02           ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  4:02           ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  4:23           ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  4:23             ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  4:23             ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  4:23             ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27 20:32   ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-27 20:32     ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-27 20:32     ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-27 22:54     ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 22:54       ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 22:54       ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-28 10:07       ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-28 10:07         ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-28 10:07         ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-25  8:53 ` [PATCH 2/5] mm: add context argument to shrinker callback Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53 ` [PATCH 3/5] superblock: introduce per-sb cache shrinker infrastructure Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-26 16:41   ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2010-05-26 16:41     ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-26 16:41     ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-26 16:41     ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-26 23:12     ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-26 23:12       ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-26 23:12       ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-26 23:12       ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  1:53       ` [PATCH 3/5 v2] " Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  1:53         ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  1:53         ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  4:01         ` Al Viro
2010-05-27  4:01           ` Al Viro
2010-05-27  4:01           ` Al Viro
2010-05-27  6:17           ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  6:17             ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  6:17             ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  6:46             ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  6:46               ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  6:46               ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  2:19       ` [PATCH 3/5] " Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  2:19         ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  2:19         ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  2:19         ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  4:07         ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  4:07           ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  4:07           ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27  4:24           ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  4:24             ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  4:24             ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  6:35   ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  6:35     ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  6:35     ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27  6:35     ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27 22:40     ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 22:40       ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 22:40       ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 22:40       ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-28  5:19       ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-28  5:19         ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-28  5:19         ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-28  5:19         ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-31  6:39         ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-31  6:39           ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-31  6:39           ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-31  6:39           ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-31  7:28           ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-31  7:28             ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-31  7:28             ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-31  7:28             ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27 20:32   ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-27 20:32     ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-27 20:32     ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-27 23:01     ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 23:01       ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 23:01       ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53 ` [PATCH 4/5] superblock: add filesystem shrinker operations Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 20:32   ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-27 20:32     ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-27 20:32     ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-25  8:53 ` [PATCH 5/5] xfs: make use of new shrinker callout Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-25  8:53   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-26 16:44 ` [PATCH 0/5] Per superblock shrinkers V2 Nick Piggin
2010-05-26 16:44   ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-26 16:44   ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27 20:32 ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-27 20:32   ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-27 20:32   ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-28  0:30   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-28  0:30     ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-28  0:30     ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-28  7:42   ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-05-28  7:42     ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-05-28  7:42     ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-05-28  7:42     ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-02 12:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-02 12:13   ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-02 12:13   ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-12  2:41   ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-12  2:41     ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-12  2:41     ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-12  2:52     ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-12  2:52       ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-12  2:52       ` Christoph Hellwig
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-05-14  7:24 [PATCH 0/5] Per-superblock shrinkers Dave Chinner
2010-05-14  7:24 ` [PATCH 3/5] superblock: introduce per-sb cache shrinker infrastructure Dave Chinner
2010-05-14  7:24   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-14  7:24   ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-14  7:24   ` Dave Chinner

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100526164116.GD22536@laptop \
    --to=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.