Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934047AbaD2R45 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2014 13:56:57 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:46336 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933478AbaD2R44 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2014 13:56:56 -0400 Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 18:56:54 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: dcache shrink list corruption? Message-ID: <20140429175654.GI18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20140429160139.GA3113@tucsk.piliscsaba.szeredi.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140429160139.GA3113@tucsk.piliscsaba.szeredi.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 06:01:39PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > Attached patch is just a starting point (untested). Not sure how to minimize > contention without adding too much complexity. Contention isn't the worst problem here - I'd expect the cacheline ping-pong to hurt more... I agree with the analysis, but I'd really like to avoid that spinlock ;-/ Let me see if we can avoid that... Oh, well - at least that's a good excuse to take a break from fucking deadlock analysis around the damn acct(2), most of VFS and network filesystems ;-/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/