On 3/1/13 12:00 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 10:42:25AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> Use a percpu counter rather than atomic types for shrinker accounting. >> There's no need for ultimate accuracy in the shrinker, so this >> should come a little more cheaply. The percpu struct is somewhat >> large, but there was a big gap before the cache-aligned >> s_es_lru_lock anyway, and it fits nicely in there. > > I thought about using percpu counters, but I was worried about the > size on really big machines. OTOH, it will be the really large NUMA > machines where atomic_t will really hurt, so maybe we should use > percpu countesr and not really worry about it. It's on a per file > system basis, so even if it is a few hundred bytes it shouldn't break > the bank. > > - Ted > I was mostly keying off what quota felt was best, I guess. I'm not wedded to either approach, it was just a thought. So you can take it or leave it. :) Thanks, -Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
