On Mon, 3 Jun 2013 23:29:33 +0400 Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > With the dentry LRUs being per-sb structures, there is no real need > for a global dentry_lru_lock. The locking can be made more > fine-grained by moving to a per-sb LRU lock, isolating the LRU > operations of different filesytsems completely from each other. What's the point to this patch? Is it to enable some additional development, or is it a standalone performance tweak? If the latter then the patch obviously makes this dentry code bloatier and straight-line slower. So we're assuming that the multiprocessor contention-avoidance benefits will outweigh that cost. Got any proof of this? -- 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>