Re: [patch 37/52] fs: icache lazy lru
From: Nick Piggin
Date: Wed Jun 30 2010 - 10:34:29 EST
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 06:38:14PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:02:49PM +1000, npiggin@xxxxxxx wrote:
> > Impelemnt lazy inode lru similarly to dcache. This will reduce lock
> > acquisition and will help to improve lock ordering subsequently.
> I'm not sure we want the I_REFERENCED reclaim free pass for a clean
> inode that has been put on the LRU directly. I can see exactly how
> it is benficial to delay reclaim of dirty inodes (XFS uses that
> trick), but in terms of aging the cache we've already done this
> free pass trick at the dentry level. Hence I think the frequent
> separate access patterns tend to be filtered out at the dcache level
> and hence we don't need to handle that in the inode cache.
> Perhaps we only need the I_REFERENCED flag to give dirty inodes a
> chance to be flushed by other means before forcing reclaim to do
> inode writeback?
It doesn't force flush, but it force invalidates pagecache.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/