[lkml]   [1999]   [Aug]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: kupdate & laptop's [patch for integration of mobile-update]
    Richard Gooch wrote:
    > Zack Weinberg writes:
    > > I'd like to see atime updates be recorded in memory but not flushed
    > > back until the inode cache is shrunk, the fs is unmounted, or we
    > > need to write back the inode for some other reason. Sort of like
    > > the current handling of dtime in ext2. This should give the speed
    > > improvement without losing the information.
    > Except a big recursive diff can then lead to a delayed storm of
    > writes. Very annoying. One of the reasons I mount with noatime.

    If delayed atime is implemented correctly, this shouldn't happen. The
    inodes will sit in memory until we need the memory for something else;
    if your recursive diff doesn't thrash the disk cache, you're fine. If
    it does thrash the cache, you were going to lose anyway.

    Hmm... looking at fs/inode.c, we could do this by setting
    inode->i_state & I_DIRTY in update_atime, but leaving it on the
    in-use list. __mark_inode_dirty would have to move to the dirty list
    irrespective of whether I_DIRTY was set or not, and we'd have to make
    sure this didn't cause problems in clear_inode etc.

    Incidentally: mark_inode_dirty checks i_state & I_DIRTY, then calls
    __mark_inode_dirty, which grabs the inode_lock and checks it again.
    Is the second check necessary?


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.037 / U:23.900 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site