[lkml]   [2004]   [May]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: dentry bloat.
Linus Torvalds <> wrote:
> On Sat, 8 May 2004, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > I think we can simply take ->d_lock a bit earlier in __d_lookup. That will
> > serialise against d_move(), fixing the problem which you mention, and also
> > makes d_movecount go away.
> If you do that, RCU basically loses most of it's meaning.
> You'll be taking a lock for - and dirtying in the cache - every single
> dentry on the hash chain, which is pretty much guaranteed to be slower
> than just taking the dcache_lock _once_, even if that one jumps across
> CPU's a lot.

Can take the lock after comparing the hash and the parent?

And if we recheck those after locking, d_movecount is unneeded?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:03    [W:0.096 / U:0.992 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site