![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, Mar 09, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> commented your patch a bit.> and attached a corrected version. please review it.
>
Thanks! I'll send the corrected patch.
So, everythings fine now?
> > d_free(dentry);
> > if (parent != dentry)
> > dput(parent);
> > spin_lock(&dcache_lock);
> >+ sb->s_prunes--;
> >+ if (likely(!sb->s_prunes))> <<< Is it possibe to do something like:
> if (unlikely(!sb->s_root && !sb->s_prunes))
> ?
Uh, I forgot about that one. You already complained about that before :(
> > void shrink_dcache_parent(struct dentry * parent)> > {> > int found;
> >+ struct super_block *sb = parent->d_sb;
> >
> >+ again:
> > while ((found = select_parent(parent)) != 0)
> > prune_dcache(found);
> >+
> >+ /* If we are called from generic_shutdown_super() during
> >+ * umount of a filesystem, we want to check for other prunes */
> >+ if (!sb->s_root && wait_on_prunes(sb))
> >+ goto again;> <<<< I don't like this loop here as it looks like a hack for some
> special case.
> better to move it to generic_shutdown() and omit sb->s_root check at all.
>
Yes, looks a little cleaner though.
Regards,
Jan
--
Jan Blunck jblunck@suse.de
SuSE LINUX AG - A Novell company
Maxfeldstr. 5 +49-911-74053-608
D-90409 Nürnberg http://www.suse.de
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-03-09 16:12 [W:0.165 / U:0.050 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||