Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:50:31 +0800 | From | Wu Fengguang <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/6] writeback: moving expire targets for background/kupdate works |
| |
Hi Christoph,
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 12:34:50PM +0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Hi Wu, > > if you're queueing up writeback changes can you look into splitting > inode_wb_list_lock as it was done in earlier versions of the inode > scalability patches? Especially if we don't get the I/O less > balance_dirty_pages in ASAP it'll at least allows us to scale the > busy waiting for the list manipulationes to one CPU per BDI.
Do you mean to split inode_wb_list_lock into struct bdi_writeback? So as to improve at least the JBOD case now and hopefully benefit the 1-bdi case when switching to multiple bdi_writeback per bdi in future?
I've not touched any locking code before, but it looks like some dumb code replacement. Let me try it :)
Thanks, Fengguang
| |