From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [patch 0/3] A few patches for dcache Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 16:59:51 +1000 Message-ID: <20110729065951.GE5404@dastard> References: <20110728131219.146414619@openvz.org> <20110729032503.GD5404@dastard> <20110729055918.GB15883@sun> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Al Viro , LINUXFS-ML , Andrew Morton , Christoph Hellwig , James Bottomley , xemul@openvz.org To: Cyrill Gorcunov Return-path: Received: from ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.145]:59244 "EHLO ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753005Ab1G2G74 (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2011 02:59:56 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110729055918.GB15883@sun> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 09:59:18AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 01:25:03PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > ... > > > > The VFS shrinker code is now already called on a per-sb basis. Each > > sb has it's own shrinker context that deals with dentries, inodes > > and anything a filesystem wants to have shrunk in the call. That > > solves the original issue I had with your "limit the dentry cache > > size" patch series in that it didn't shrink or limit the other VFS > > caches that were the ones that were really consuming all your > > memory... > > Thanks for comments, Dave! Still the read only lock without > increasing sequence number might be useful, no? (patch 1) I'll defer to Al on that one - the intricacies of the rename locking are way over my head. FWIW, the problems with the per-sb dcache LRU lock seem to be gone - it's not causing my test machines to fall over with the current Linus tree like it was during 2.6.39-rc and 3.0-rc kernels... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com