From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/19] fs: buffer: Do not use unnecessary atomic operations when discarding buffers Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 15:30:50 +0100 Message-ID: <20140513143050.GU23991@suse.de> References: <1399974350-11089-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <1399974350-11089-18-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <20140513110951.GB30445@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20140513125007.GQ23991@suse.de> <20140513134943.GD22070@quack.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , Vlastimil Babka , Michal Hocko , Hugh Dickins , Dave Hansen , Linux Kernel , Linux-MM , Linux-FSDevel To: Jan Kara Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140513134943.GD22070@quack.suse.cz> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 03:49:43PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > > operation which is available on a lot of architectures, we'll be stuck > > > with a cmpxchg loop instead :/ > > > > > > *sigh* > > > > > > Anyway, nothing wrong with this patch, however, you could, if you really > > > wanted to push things, also include BH_Lock in that clear :-) > > > > That's a bold strategy Cotton. > > > > Untested patch on top > Although this looks correct, I have to say I prefer the explicit > unlock_buffer() unless this has a measurable benefit. > I will keep this as a separate patch, move it to the end of the series and check what the profiles look like. Thanks. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- 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: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933089AbaEMOa4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 May 2014 10:30:56 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:57500 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760129AbaEMOay (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 May 2014 10:30:54 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 15:30:50 +0100 From: Mel Gorman To: Jan Kara Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , Vlastimil Babka , Michal Hocko , Hugh Dickins , Dave Hansen , Linux Kernel , Linux-MM , Linux-FSDevel Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/19] fs: buffer: Do not use unnecessary atomic operations when discarding buffers Message-ID: <20140513143050.GU23991@suse.de> References: <1399974350-11089-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <1399974350-11089-18-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <20140513110951.GB30445@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20140513125007.GQ23991@suse.de> <20140513134943.GD22070@quack.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140513134943.GD22070@quack.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 03:49:43PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > > operation which is available on a lot of architectures, we'll be stuck > > > with a cmpxchg loop instead :/ > > > > > > *sigh* > > > > > > Anyway, nothing wrong with this patch, however, you could, if you really > > > wanted to push things, also include BH_Lock in that clear :-) > > > > That's a bold strategy Cotton. > > > > Untested patch on top > Although this looks correct, I have to say I prefer the explicit > unlock_buffer() unless this has a measurable benefit. > I will keep this as a separate patch, move it to the end of the series and check what the profiles look like. Thanks. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs