Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935992AbXLQWhe (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:37:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759605AbXLQWhO (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:37:14 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:39867 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761614AbXLQWhM (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:37:12 -0500 Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <200712141508.23756.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> References: <200712141508.23756.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <20071205193818.24617.79771.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20071205193909.24617.26538.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> To: Nick Piggin Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, viro@ftp.linux.org.uk, hch@infradead.org, Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com, sds@tycho.nsa.gov, casey@schaufler-ca.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/28] FS-Cache: Recruit a couple of page flags for cache management [try #2] X-Mailer: MH-E 8.0.3+cvs; nmh 1.2-20070115cvs; GNU Emacs 23.0.50 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:36:06 +0000 Message-ID: <643.1197930966@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1186 Lines: 27 Nick Piggin wrote: > I'd much prefer if you would handle this in the filesystem, and have it > set PG_private whenever fscache needs to receive a callback, and DTRT > depending on whether PG_fscache etc. is set or not. That's tricky and slower[*]. One of the things I want to do is to modify iso9660 to do be able to do caching, but PG_private is 'owned' by the generic buffer cache code. [*] though perhaps not significantly. > Also, this wait_on_page_fscache_write / end_page_fscache_write stuff > seems like it would belong in your fscache headers rather than generic > mm code (ditto for your PG_fscache checks in the page allocator -- you > should use their PG_owner_priv_? names for that). I suppose that's reasonable, though I do want to mention the PG_fscache* bits in linux/page-flags.h so that anyone looking at those bits to select one to use can easily see a reason they might not want to. David -- 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/