From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cyrill Gorcunov Subject: Re: [patch 0/3] A few patches for dcache Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:01:54 +0400 Message-ID: <20110729070153.GC15883@sun> References: <20110728131219.146414619@openvz.org> <20110729032503.GD5404@dastard> <20110729055918.GB15883@sun> <20110729065951.GE5404@dastard> 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: Dave Chinner Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:48725 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754835Ab1G2HCA (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2011 03:02:00 -0400 Received: by fxh19 with SMTP id 19so1999284fxh.19 for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 00:01:58 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110729065951.GE5404@dastard> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 04:59:51PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: ... > > > > 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. ok > > 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. ok, thanks for info! Cyrill