From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 25 Sep 2001 18:59:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 25 Sep 2001 18:58:52 -0400 Received: from [195.223.140.107] ([195.223.140.107]:47344 "EHLO athlon.random") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 25 Sep 2001 18:58:33 -0400 Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 00:59:03 +0200 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: "David S. Miller" Cc: marcelo@conectiva.com.br, torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Locking comment on shrink_caches() Message-ID: <20010926005903.T8350@athlon.random> In-Reply-To: <20010925.131528.78383994.davem@redhat.com> <20010926000102.G8350@athlon.random> <20010925.150328.75780096.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010925.150328.75780096.davem@redhat.com>; from davem@redhat.com on Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 03:03:28PM -0700 X-GnuPG-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.gnupg.asc X-PGP-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.asc Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 03:03:28PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Andrea Arcangeli > Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 00:01:02 +0200 > > IMHO if we would hold the pagecache lock all the time while shrinking > the cache, then we could kill the lru lock in first place. > > And actually in the pagecache locking patches, doing such a thing > would be impossible :-) since each page needs to grab a different good further point too :), it would be an option only for mainline. Andrea