From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753510Ab2IUMRV (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:17:21 -0400 Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:36973 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751409Ab2IUMRT (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:17:19 -0400 Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 06:17:18 -0600 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Guo Chao Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, dchinner@redhat.com, hch@infradead.org, jack@suse.cz, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC v4 Patch 0/4] fs/inode.c: optimization for inode lock usage Message-ID: <20120921121717.GB24919@parisc-linux.org> References: <1348219866-1799-1-git-send-email-yan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1348219866-1799-1-git-send-email-yan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 05:31:02PM +0800, Guo Chao wrote: > This patchset optimizes several places which take the per inode spin lock. > They have not been fully tested yet, thus they are marked as RFC. > > I do limited tests after all patches applied: use two 'find' to traverse the > filesystems and touch all files in parallel. This runs for several days in a > virtual machine, no suspicious log appears. Have you done any performance testing? Taking and releasing a lock which isn't contended is not particularly expensive. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."