From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/31] dentry: move to per-sb LRU locks Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 18:16:41 +1000 Message-ID: <20130510081641.GS23072@dastard> References: <1368079608-5611-1-git-send-email-glommer@openvz.org> <1368079608-5611-5-git-send-email-glommer@openvz.org> <20130510052934.GR23072@dastard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , hughd@google.com, Greg Thelen , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Chinner To: Glauber Costa Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130510052934.GR23072@dastard> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 03:29:34PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 10:06:21AM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > > From: Dave Chinner > > > > With the dentry LRUs being per-sb structures, there is no real need > > for a global dentry_lru_lock. The locking can be made more > > fine-grained by moving to a per-sb LRU lock, isolating the LRU > > operations of different filesytsems completely from each other. > > > > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig > > Acked-by: Mel Gorman > > Doesn't apply to a current linus tree. What is this patchset based No, this is too painful. It doesn't apply to a 3.9 tree, and it BUG-ONs in the dcache on a current Linus tree, probably because I didn't resolve one of the 10 or so patches that didn't apply correctly.... So, I'm going to wait until there's a version that applies to the current TOT and go from there.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com -- 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