On 11/25/2014 06:33 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: <> > > I was concerned about putting them on the dirty inode list because it > would be extra inodes for the writeback threads would have to skip > over and ignore (since they would not be dirty in the inde or data > pages sense). > > Another solution would be to use a separate linked list for dirtytime > inodes, but that means adding some extra fields to the inode > structure, which some might view as bloat. You could use the same list-head for both lists. If the inode is on the dirty-inode-list then no need to add it to the list-for-dirtytime, it will be written soon anyway. else you add it to the list-for-dirtytime. If you (real)dirty an inode then you first remove it from the list-for-dirtytime first, and then add it to the dirty-inode-list. So at each given time it is only on one list <> Cheers Boaz _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
