Re: [fuse-devel] [PATCH 14/14] mm: Account for WRITEBACK_TEMP in balance_dirty_pages

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]