On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 11:51:25 +0200 jblunck@xxxxxxx wrote: > This is an attempt to have per-superblock unused dentry lists. Fairly significant clashes with ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.17-rc5/2.6.17-rc5-mm2/broken-out/fix-dcache-race-during-umount.patch I guess Neil's patch will go into the 2.6.18 tree, so you'd be best off working against that. Also, you're making what appears to be a quite deep design change to a pretty important part of the memory reclaim code and all the info we have is this: + /* + * Try to be fair to the unused lists: + * sb_count/sb_unused ~ count/global_unused + * + * Additionally, if the age_limit of the + * superblock is expired shrink at least one + * dentry from the superblock + */ + tmp = sb->s_dentry_stat.nr_unused / + ((unused / count) + 1); + if (!tmp && time_after(jiffies, + sb->s_dentry_unused_age)) + tmp = 1; Please, we'll need much much more description of what this is trying to achieve, why it exists, analysis, testing results, etc, etc. Coz my immediate reaction is "wtf is that, and what will that do to my computer?". In particular, `jiffies' has near-to-zero correlation with the rate of creation and reclaim of these objects, so it looks highly inappropriate that it's in there. If anything can be used to measure "time" in this code it is the number of scanned entries, not jiffies. But I cannot say more, because I do not know what that code is doing, nor what problem it is trying to solve. The patch changelog would be an appropriate place for that info ;) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
