From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: npiggin@kernel.dk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 13/14] fs: icache split IO and LRU lists
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 11:00:28 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101022000028.GE3270@amd> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1010211018250.24115@router.home>
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 10:28:42AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Oct 2010, npiggin@kernel.dk wrote:
>
> > Split inode reclaim and writeback lists in preparation to scale them up
> > (per-bdi locking for i_io and per-zone locking for i_lru)
>
> Why per zone and not per node? Is there any chance of having lru lists for
> ZONE_NORMAL and ZONE_DMA?
I guess I see that as coupling a bit too much with the MM. We know that
zones are the unit of allocation and reclaim, but I don't think we need
to care about which zones we need to care about, or the node:zone
relationship.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-22 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-21 13:08 [patch 00/14] reworked minimal inode_lock breaking series npiggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 01/14] fs: icache begin inode_lock lock breaking npiggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 02/14] fs: icache lock i_count npiggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 03/14] fs: icache lock inodes icache state npiggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 04/14] fs: icache unmount code cleanup npiggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 05/14] fs: icache lock s_inodes list npiggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 06/14] fs: icache lock inode hash npiggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 07/14] fs: icache lock lru/writeback lists npiggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 08/14] fs: icache make nr_inodes and nr_unused atomic npiggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 09/14] fs: inode atomic last_ino, iunique lock npiggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 10/14] fs: icache remove inode_lock npiggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 11/14] fs: icache factor hash lock into functions npiggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 12/14] fs: icache lazy inode lru npiggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 13/14] fs: icache split IO and LRU lists npiggin
2010-10-21 15:28 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-10-22 0:00 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2010-10-22 1:05 ` Nick Piggin
2010-10-21 13:08 ` [patch 14/14] fs: icache split writeback and lru locks npiggin
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=20101022000028.GE3270@amd \
--to=npiggin@kernel.dk \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).