From: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] Remove fasync() BKL usage, take 3325
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:13:47 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1233166427.5202.907.camel@calx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090128175541.GA7074@infradead.org>
On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 12:55 -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 10:44:14AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > If others disagree, and using bitops is not an idea which will fly, I'd
> > sure like to know sooner rather than later.
>
> There are more than enough use cases that have large numbers of open
> files (e.g. various high-end network servers). While it might not be
> as sewer as for inodes I think it's really bad idea to do it for no
> reason.
Maybe we can just demote f_ep_lock to f_lock and share it?
Or extend flags and have two independent bitlocks in it. This actually
shrinks struct_file for most users.
--
http://selenic.com : development and support for Mercurial and Linux
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-28 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-15 22:32 [PATCH, RFC] Remove fasync() BKL usage, take 3325 Jonathan Corbet
2009-01-22 14:51 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-22 16:09 ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-23 5:21 ` Jonathan Corbet
2009-01-22 20:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-01-23 4:56 ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-28 0:53 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-28 0:55 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-28 3:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-28 3:57 ` Jonathan Corbet
2009-01-28 4:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-01-28 14:13 ` Jonathan Corbet
2009-01-28 17:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-01-28 17:44 ` Jonathan Corbet
2009-01-28 17:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-01-28 18:13 ` Matt Mackall [this message]
2009-01-28 21:05 ` Jonathan Corbet
2009-01-28 18:14 ` David Daney
2009-01-29 14:37 ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-23 5:15 ` Jonathan Corbet
2009-01-23 5:31 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-23 5:45 ` Matt Mackall
2009-01-23 6:15 ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-23 10:45 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2009-01-23 5:54 ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-23 6:01 ` Jonathan Corbet
2009-01-23 6:57 ` Andrew Morton
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=1233166427.5202.907.camel@calx \
--to=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/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