[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: invalidate_inode_pages in 2.5.32/3
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Andrew Morton wrote:

> But it's the same story: the requirements of
> a) non blocking local IO daemon and
> b) assured pagecache takedown
> are conflicting. You need at least one more thread, and locking
> against userspace activity.

I see no problem with adding another thread to handle the breaks.

Only the cost of an extra thread and the fact that smbiod was originally
created to handle the break (with a thought to eventually make it do the
IO as it does now) makes me want to put it in smbiod.


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 13:28    [W:0.212 / U:0.144 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site