Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 10 Feb 1999 12:01:23 +0000 | From | Steve Dodd <> | Subject | Re: [patch] real fix [Re: [patch] fixed 2.2.1 inode-leakage due bogus design of the free_inodes algorithm |
| |
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 05, 1999 at 12:46:43AM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> free_inode_memory() is ok to not be recalled from try_to_free_pages() > because it can't generate more free memory but only more clean inode to > reuse in the filesystem so only the fs must call it when get_new_inode() > or something similar fails.
Except in NTFS (I think), where clea{r,n}ing an inode frees up some memory allocated specifically by the file system.
I notice Alexander Viro wrote also:
> [2] BTW, life would be *much* easier if we'ld keep fs-specific parts of > inode and super allocated separately. I did it for ext2 and it seems to > work fine. If it would be done for all filesystems the memory usage would > decrease for almost everybody.
So it might be the same also for ext2.
If this is the case I see two options - i) call free_inode_memory() from try_to_free_pages(), or ii) create a list of 'create free memory' routines that try_to_free_pages() can call; filesystems / other things can call routines to register / unregister create free memory functions.
S.
-- Fortune: You will be attacked next Wednesday at 3:15 p.m. by six samuri sword wielding purple fish glued to Harley-Davidson motorcycles.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |