lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 04/19] fs: Implement lazy LRU updates for inodes.
    On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 04:34:22AM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
    > > This might actually be the better approach anyway (even for upstream)
    > > -- it means we don't have to worry about the "check head element"
    > > heuristic of the LRU check which could get false negatives if there is
    > > a lot of concurrency on the LRU.
    >
    > Oh hmm, but then you do have the double lock of the LRU lock.
    >
    > if (can_unuse_after_iput(inode)) {
    > spin_lock(&inode_lock);
    > list_move(inode, list tail)
    > spin_unlock(&inode_lock);
    > }
    > iput(inode);
    > spin_lock(&inode_lock);
    >
    > Is that worth it?

    Probably not.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-10-17 02:51    [W:0.021 / U:33.200 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site