On Sat, 2010-06-19 at 23:07 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > First remove items from work_list as soon as we start working on them. This > means we don't have to track any pending or visited state and can get > rid of all the RCU magic freeing the work items - we can simply free > them once the operation has finished. Second use a real completion for > tracking synchronous requests - if the caller sets the completion pointer > we complete it, otherwise use it as a boolean indicator that we can free > the work item directly. Third unify struct wb_writeback_args and struct > bdi_work into a single data structure, wb_writeback_work. Previous we > set all parameters into a struct wb_writeback_args, copied it into > struct bdi_work, copied it again on the stack to use it there. Instead > of just allocate one structure dynamically or on the stack and use it > all the way through the stack. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Christoph, thanks for simplifying this. I wonder also, why do we need the bdi_pending_list - for me it looks redundant. Also, do we need the forker task? It hurts because it wakes up every 5 sec jut to check whether it has to fork something and to waste the battery energy. Do we really need to bdi threads to kill themselves after 5 minutes of inactivity? I'm going to work on optimizing the forker per-bdi threads wake-ups. But for the forker - it seems it is better to just get rid of it completely. Jens, what do you think? -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий) -- 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
