Wang Sheng-Hui wrote:
> Sorry. regerated the patch, please check it.
> I wrapped most code in single pair of spinlock ops for 2 reasons:
> 1) get spinlock 2 times seems time consuming
> 2) use single pair of spinlock ops can keep "count"
> consistent for the shrink operation. 2 pairs may
> get some new ces created by other processes.
>
Sorry, this patch appears to have whitespace cut & paste mangling.
More comments below.
> Signed-off-by: Wang Sheng-Hui <crosslonelyover@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/mbcache.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------
> 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/mbcache.c b/fs/mbcache.c
> index ec88ff3..ee57aa3 100644
> --- a/fs/mbcache.c
> +++ b/fs/mbcache.c
> @@ -201,21 +201,15 @@ mb_cache_shrink_fn(int nr_to_scan, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> {
> LIST_HEAD(free_list);
> struct list_head *l, *ltmp;
> + struct mb_cache *cache;
> int count = 0;
>
> - spin_lock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
> - list_for_each(l, &mb_cache_list) {
> - struct mb_cache *cache =
> - list_entry(l, struct mb_cache, c_cache_list);
> - mb_debug("cache %s (%d)", cache->c_name,
> - atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count));
> - count += atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count);
> - }
> mb_debug("trying to free %d entries", nr_to_scan);
> - if (nr_to_scan == 0) {
> - spin_unlock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
> +
> + spin_lock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
> + if (nr_to_scan == 0)
> goto out;
> - }
> +
> while (nr_to_scan-- && !list_empty(&mb_cache_lru_list)) {
> struct mb_cache_entry *ce =
> list_entry(mb_cache_lru_list.next,
> @@ -223,12 +217,18 @@ mb_cache_shrink_fn(int nr_to_scan, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> list_move_tail(&ce->e_lru_list, &free_list);
> __mb_cache_entry_unhash(ce);
> }
> - spin_unlock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
you can't do this because
> list_for_each_safe(l, ltmp, &free_list) {
> __mb_cache_entry_forget(list_entry(l, struct mb_cache_entry,
this takes the spinlock too and you'll deadlock.
Did you test this patch?
-Eric
> e_lru_list), gfp_mask);
> }
> out:
> + list_for_each_entry(cache, &mb_cache_list, c_cache_list) {
> + mb_debug("cache %s (%d)", cache->c_name,
> + atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count));
> + count += atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count);
> + }
> + spin_unlock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
> +
> return (count / 100) * sysctl_vfs_cache_pressure;
> }
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>