On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Maxim V. Patlasov <mpatlasov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm for accounting NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP because balance_dirty_pages is already > overcomplicated (imho) and adding new clauses for FUSE makes me sick. Agreed. But instead of further complexifying balance_dirty_pages() fuse specific throttling can be done in fuse_page_mkwrite(), I think. And at that point NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP really becomes irrelevant to the dirty balancing logic. Thanks, Miklos -- 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
