On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 10:45:23 +0900 Kentaro Makita <k-makita@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> o add cond_resched_lock(&dcache_lock) while scanning LRU lists on superblocks
> in __shrink_dcache_sb()
>
> Signed-off-by: Kentaro Makita <k-makita@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/dcache.c | 1 +
> 1 files changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> Index: b/fs/dcache.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/fs/dcache.c 2008-06-05 11:48:57.000000000 +0900
> +++ b/fs/dcache.c 2008-06-05 11:49:19.000000000 +0900
> @@ -484,6 +484,7 @@ restart:
> if (--cnt == 0)
> break;
> }
> + cond_resched_lock(&dcache_lock);
> }
> }
> while (!list_empty(&tmp)) {
The changelog is insufficient. It tells us what the patch did (which
was completely obvious anyway) but it fails to tell us _why_ the patch
did it.
That is is easily guessable but a good changelog would have described
the problem which you observed and would have described how the the
patch changed the runtime behaviour.
And this is not a trivial formality either. Because if, for example,
the problem whcih you are fixing here is "machine goes comatose for ten
minutes" then we'll need algorithmic changes and not a bandaid of this
nature.
--
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
