Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932905Ab1FBJbO (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jun 2011 05:31:14 -0400 Received: from webhosting01.bon.m2soft.com ([195.38.20.32]:35867 "EHLO webhosting01.bon.m2soft.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932439Ab1FBJbN (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jun 2011 05:31:13 -0400 Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 11:30:26 +0200 From: Nicolas Kaiser To: Dave Chinner Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] vfs: increase shrinker batch size Message-ID: <20110602113026.7291b1a7@absol.kitzblitz> In-Reply-To: <1306998067-27659-12-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> References: <1306998067-27659-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1306998067-27659-12-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> Organization: - Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwAQMAAABtzGvEAAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAAAZQTFRF AJnV/f/88sgWwwAAAKNJREFUGNM10LENwyAQheFHKCgZgTVSRHI2gy5reROTDSiREvnyHhdXnwXS+ T+ACJgBYTiGSmDDOTdR7XDeTi9ksxEcoKFcTOCJLO7kC5SWFjPZCR69nI9+x5u6OJM1RN5UYUiNKa ZRpHHUoqh1v8hKEZ1FSGCrYOvgVmxd9DIXcSJwLTycm7bj0e4wkJGB48w/FckAwUKl/OGDZAcqItk BU+wHXLqKsjYyPeMAAAAASUVORK5CYII= X-Mailer: Claws Mail (Linux) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1357 Lines: 38 Just noticed below two typos. * Dave Chinner : > From: Dave Chinner > > Now that the per-sb shrinker is responsible for shrinking 2 or more > caches, increase the batch size to keep econmies of scale for economies (..) > Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt | 5 +++++ > fs/super.c | 1 + > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt b/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt > index dc732d2..2e26973 100644 > --- a/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt > +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt > @@ -317,6 +317,11 @@ or bottom half). > the VM is trying to reclaim under GFP_NOFS conditions, hence this > method does not need to handle that situation itself. > > + Implementations must include conditional reschedule calls inside any > + scanning loop that is done. This allows the VFS to determine > + appropriate scan batch sizes without having to worry about whether > + implementations will cause holdoff problems due ot large batch sizes. due to Best regards, Nicolas Kaiser -- 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/