On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 20:38 -0400, Valerie Aurora wrote: > On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 04:32:19PM -0700, Frank Mayhar wrote: > > > > Before going into details of the test results, however, I must say that > > the most striking thing about Nick's work how stable it is. In all of > > :D > > > the work I've been doing, all the kernels I've built and run and all the > > tests I've run, I've run into no hangs and only one crash, that in an > > area that we happen to stress very heavily, for which I posted a patch, > > available at > > http://www.kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-fsdevel/2010/9/27/6886943 > > The crash involved the fact that we use cgroups very heavily, and there > > was an oversight in the new d_set_d_op() routine that failed to clear > > flags before it set them. > > I honestly can't stand the d_set_d_op() patch (testing flags instead > of d_op->op) because it obfuscates the code in such a way that leads > directly to this kind of bug. I don't suppose you could test the > performance effect of that specific patch and see how big of a > difference it makes? I do kind of understand why he did it but you're right that it makes things a bit error-prone. Unfortunately I'm not in a position at the moment to do a lot more testing and analysis. I'll try to find some spare time in which to do some more testing of both this and Dave Chinner's tree, but no promises. -- Frank Mayhar <fmayhar@xxxxxxxxxx> Google Inc. -- 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>