From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH] percpu_counter: Put a reasonable upper bound on percpu_counter_batch Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 01:44:58 +0900 Message-ID: <20110906164458.GI18425@mtj.dyndns.org> References: <20110826072622.406d3395@kryten> <20110826072927.5b4781f9@kryten> <1314347983.2563.1.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC> <20110829214609.495ee299@kryten> <20110906034851.GC18425@mtj.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Anton Blanchard , Eric Dumazet , adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Theodore Tso Return-path: Received: from mail-gx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.161.174]:61786 "EHLO mail-gx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752143Ab1IFQpL (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Sep 2011 12:45:11 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 09:30:50AM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > >> I chose to cap percpu_counter_batch at 1024 as a conservative firs= t > >> step, but we may want to reduce it further based on further benchm= arking. > >>=20 > >> Signed-off-by: Anton Blanchard > >=20 > > Applied to percpu/for-3.2. >=20 > Um, this was an ext4 patch and I pointed out it could cause problems.= (Specifically, data loss=E2=80=A6) Ah okay, I thought you were talking about the first patch only. Reverting for now. Thanks. --=20 tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html