[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:0.020 / U:38.068 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site