From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [62.89.141.173]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F15C261388 for ; Fri, 3 Apr 2026 23:58:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775260708; cv=none; b=bkJPsxJj78OfxQY1v5m7sVQwOwLnXIbZkf01X+9/dlBAy3m1T1c7lWcnVBcN3KzJMD/RIIlYD3Dk5W+NxvZPYh1maU3L8He6aAuHlq8MX4/dWl1z6gV5km7zCfFfsNv2lVJadb2YK5bkGXSCLDbkGkXh2v02IU66vWHLeqDejuY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775260708; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9wZbpzrk9hRpaJOd6WbeQSAkkJI1y2yU4ZKP1vV31gg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=qeeytBg8a2NI2ivfkZPDEIo6qzT+JjhWALhDFvVLUFesryXD984zW5lrx+jPA+uE/fhCSdgdCOOW8OsgUqw0Uf8NI4rV6Xt/J7ldM0Sa4+M/6olX/SmcRwGmNN6fug240aBb/fxtTG2AvMpMseVJLaPUnuuH4xs5ELXyfIWM/3k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b=QQ93Puoi; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b="QQ93Puoi" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.org.uk; s=zeniv-20220401; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=/Mz65QNV1lPgDDvgyQRQT4TRpbTlTLmldtn+wgh6Ee0=; b=QQ93PuoiTUq1sS7DIW7vkJ3t5s CHYauAUQOLSy0CPnwvlEYbb/1xGm6dbAwEBYpNuoBH64n+o02ikLiurazwAAFUL8U6WF7/m0MQQD9 nzKCZIDbwMsxIz7eueHKHYwWwMYc1H7OP0Qko9lqV4qcd3ksriSy1JZGx/wAwtycqid/9ddOSDi6U VNxolkNXNWcH6HxejeFxhmhsI0YTU8Vf6KqwIDVFPKHATEU7x7fqPElRHhEi544F6jVtVzGvnBM/v +MQ7dSfu4yOU1nKDR7MOYQERWkpJsGx52hxXh8BVpH3oODRNMPClfHZxIEGRmxjcNj/Q1Ay4dMkRx r5rKI28w==; Received: from viro by zeniv.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1w8oSf-00000009xZm-03OP; Sat, 04 Apr 2026 00:02:01 +0000 Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2026 01:02:00 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Linus Torvalds Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Christian Brauner , Jan Kara , Nikolay Borisov , Max Kellermann , Eric Sandeen , Paulo Alcantara Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] get rid of busy-waiting in shrink_dcache_tree() Message-ID: <20260404000200.GO3836593@ZenIV> References: <20260122202025.GG3183987@ZenIV> <20260402180850.3729310-1-viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> <20260402180850.3729310-5-viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> <20260402224439.GI3836593@ZenIV> <20260402231643.GJ3836593@ZenIV> <20260403021522.GK3836593@ZenIV> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260403021522.GK3836593@ZenIV> Sender: Al Viro On Fri, Apr 03, 2026 at 03:15:22AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Thu, Apr 02, 2026 at 05:29:28PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 at 16:13, Al Viro wrote: > > > > > > The incremental I've got right now is > > > > LGTM. > > Force-pushed... FWIW, I wonder if we would be better off with something like struct completion_list { struct completion completion; struct completion_list *next; }; embedded into select_data, with dentry->waiters being a pointer to that. It's just that dragging struct select_data into that, even as an opaque pointer, tastes wrong ;-/ Preferences?