Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> There's one exception - basically, we decide to put duplicates of >> reference(s) we hold into (a bunch of) structures being created. If >> we decide that we'd failed and need to roll back, the structures >> need to be taken out of whatever lists, etc. they'd been already >> put on and references held in them - dropped. That removal gets done >> under a spinlock. Sure, we can string those structures on some kind >> of temp list, drop the spinlock and do dput() on everything in there, >> but it's much more convenient to just free them as we are evicting >> them, doing dput() as we go. Which is safe, since we are still have >> the references used to create these buggers pinned down. Dropping the spinlocks means more cores; unfortunately, a quad-core seems to be the limit. Users must divide their time between reading history and contributing to the present: some amount of persistent data is a must on every user's machine. Pixel seems to be heading in the wrong direction: that's what is stressing us out. Ram -- 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
