On Tue 26-06-12 03:35:46, mc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Quoting Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>:
>
> >On Thu 21-06-12 17:00:27, Cong Meng wrote:
> >>Go through the LRU list of inode from head.
> >>
> >>(I'm not sure whether there is any trick here I doesn't get. If yes,
> >>any one could explain it)
> > Look at inode_lru_list_add(). It adds at the head of the list. So you
> >should take from the tail to get the least recently used element...
>
> I still have a quetion about the subsequent code and comment:
>
> inode = list_entry(sb->s_inode_lru.prev, struct inode, i_lru);
> /*
> * we are inverting the sb->s_inode_lru_lock/inode->i_lock here,
> * so use a trylock. If we fail to get the lock, just move the
> * inode to the back of the list so we don't spin on it.
> */
> if (!spin_trylock(&inode->i_lock)) {
> list_move_tail(&inode->i_lru, &sb->s_inode_lru);
> continue;
> }
>
> Shouldn't the inode be moved to the head to avoid spin on it?
Yes, it should.
> I note that list_move was replaced by list_move_tail purposely in a commit.
Right, you are speaking about Christoph's commit 62a3ddef? I agree that
commit looks bogus and should be reverted AFAICT. Christoph?
> and below piece of code (at the bottom of prune_icache_sb()):
>
> if (inode != list_entry(sb->s_inode_lru.next,
> struct inode, i_lru))
> continue; /* wrong inode or list_empty */
>
> Should the inode be compared against to the tail of the list other
> than the head
> after re-get the lru lock?
And you seem to be right here as well. Thanks for having a look!
Honza
> >>Signed-off-by: Cong Meng <mc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>---
> >> fs/inode.c | 2 +-
> >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
> >>index 775cbab..aac8449 100644
> >>--- a/fs/inode.c
> >>+++ b/fs/inode.c
> >>@@ -704,7 +704,7 @@ void prune_icache_sb(struct super_block *sb,
> >>int nr_to_scan)
> >> if (list_empty(&sb->s_inode_lru))
> >> break;
> >>
> >>- inode = list_entry(sb->s_inode_lru.prev, struct inode, i_lru);
> >>+ inode = list_entry(sb->s_inode_lru.next, struct inode, i_lru);
> >>
> >> /*
> >> * we are inverting the sb->s_inode_lru_lock/inode->i_lock here,
> >>--
> >>1.7.5.4
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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
